"Let's face it, you only need to con nine people in the ACT Assembly to get a majority and 22 million Australians are at risk..."

Well, the proponents of voluntary euthanasia have also 'conned' a majority -- what is it, 76%? -- of all Australians, so we must be pretty dumb. Thank goodness right-thinking people like Jim Wallace are here to put us straight. And I am QUITE sure that Jim's affiliation with the Australian Christian Lobby does not constitute a bias he should have revealed in his article, and that his wildly irrational belief in a Sky Fairy has no effect on his ability to logically evaluate the terrible consequences of letting people actually do what they want.

Why does Jim Wallace think he has the right to poke his nose into other peoples' lives and tell them what to do?

If he doesn't want the option of euthanasia then that's his right but he has no right to proscribe what options should be available to other people should they have an agonizing, terminal disease. Jim, whose mind is deranged by religion, may even enjoy vomiting up feces should he get bowel cancer, who would know.

His ignorance, and that of others like him, should not be allowed to stifle the debate about allowing people to die in dignity at a time of their choosing!

I want to have the choice of euthanasia, Jim. How about you mind your own bloody business!

http://www.dangerouscreation.com

Both of you, David G in particular, have missed the point of this article, which is that, while euthanasia advocates only campaign publicly about the rights of the terminally ill, they also clearly have an agenda of euthanasing anyone, terminally ill or not, who, however temporarily, just wants to top themselves.

This is a very dangerous idea for a society to embrace.

Also, having worked in the area of aged care, I have absolutely no doubt that there are many people who will callously quite selfishly put pressure on their elderly relatives - who're such a burden, after all - to get rid of themselves.

Whilst I, in principle, support the right of terminally ill patients to a painless death, I am greatly troubled by the prospect of introducing euthanasia legislation.

Oh, and I'm neither a Christian nor any sort of religious believer.

i can only agree...thou shalt not murder
[we have each EARNED..our life sentance]

this drugging people into death..[goes.on all the time]
its a huge problem in the after-life
they dont realise their dead

that gets complicated by those not believing in life..here-after
who sleep away..centuries/decads/weeks...till they realise they are only sleeping...

[worse is those decieved by religion..
into awaiting a mythical daty of reserection]
or some judgmenmt-day..that never comes

[jesus came specificly to prove..we ALL shall be born-again]
ie him..[born of woman]...returned

thus no judgment-day
no end time 2 de comming
he allready..been here..done/that

after assuring..a thief..on a cross beside him
today he TOO..would be in heaven..this day

even worse is what we do with the 'mortal shell'
sicides/murder/and other sudden death events
can retain their link to spirit..often till their bnatural 'death-time'[reportedly]..then there is the adding of preservatives..

to preserve the dead corpse
[that in not decaying can also ty the dead into the still living]

this i a huge issue
we all are ignorant of what we are doing
to the departed spirit
let alone their soul

its really time we put some serious study into our acts
and im not talking about a new tax

those ignorant of con-sequences
should see the light

see the other treasons they are doing
upon those they regard the least
in serving the adgendas of those allready got the most

realise the vile they are doing..to the least
they are doing to god..[the most]

its truelly the blind/leading the more blinded
the trouble being the blinding is done deleratly
how they shall love the hells

JonJ,

What are the ISSUES ? I don't give a toss what Wallace's politics and religious affiliations are, they're well known to this atheist - but what is out of place with what he says ? You can indulge yourself in mountain-top politics all you like, it's the easy way, the lazy way, but what are the issues that Wallace is grappling with - that's the point. And ultimately here, the issue is: do we choose life or death ?

I'm puzzled why the Greens are so fixated on death-politics - surely, from an atheist's point of view, life is all there is ? There's no 'after', so surely we should value what a precious gift we each are given (by Nature, and by our parents, not by any Sky Fairy). Most of us feel very down at times, we wonder if it is all worth it, we get burnt-out, frustrated and/or disillusioned and it would be very tempting for many people to stop the angst with a happy pill.

Not much point regretting it afterwards :(

Because, folks, there is NO afterwards.

Joe

I do wish people who oppose legal, voluntary suicide and want to impose their views on others who don't share them would at least get their English grammar right when they post on this topic.

If you are committing suicide, you are not "being euthanased". This is passive tense, and implies that someone other than the person who dies is actually killing them, when in fact they are leaving the suicide act to someone who is legally entitled to do it.

When the passive tense is used so often in this way, I'm inclined to the view that this may be a deliberate attempt to mislead.

This is not particularly ethical and not a very Christian way to behave, either.

What we have here a perfect example of the calm, balanced and rational approach that is the hallmark of busybodies everywhere.

Euthanasia is first described as "...killing a patient [as] an alternative to palliative care."

Right off the bat, we are told that the reason we want to allow people to choose to die with dignity, is to save money.

Might that not be a touch insulting to the many grief-stricken relatives who, even as we speak, are watching their loved ones live in excruciating pain, and without the ability to bring it to a close?

No. It's all about avoiding the inconvenience and cost of palliative care.

Christian charity at work. Doncha love it.

And in response to a claim by Dr. Nitschke that he was acting compassionately?

"The arrogance in this statement resonates strongly with that of other madmen in history who have presumed to play God with other people's lives."

No thought, it would seem, given to the arrogance involved in claiming the right to dictate to others whether their lives have effectively come to an end or not.

Is that not equally "playing God"? Presuming that you know what your chosen deity has in mind is, I would have thought, the absolute epitome of arrogance.

But what do I know. I'm not a Christian.

And a lovely scare for us all - every one of us - whose lives are apparently at risk.

"...you only need to con nine people in the ACT Assembly to get a majority and 22 million Australians are at risk<<

Fortunately, such a ridiculously illogical, laughably self-serving and patently untrue statement allows us to put the entire article into its proper perspective.

Thank you Clownfish, it IS difficult to find a rational response to the (worthy) arguments put by the author - who clearly discloses his religious affiliation via his by line Jon J - so your response is worth reading a few times. Voluntary Euthanasia is not a religious vs. non-religious issue. If it were that simple I (a rusted-on skeptic) wouldn't be posting. I am for personal choice based upon informed consent but those words roll off the tongue much easier than the reality would play out in the grey zones of human experience. Let's have the debate, try to keep our heads and assess the substantive, not the pointless distractions put up by those who (apparently) refuse to read and absorb what Jim Wallace is saying.

Clownfish, if you read the papers or watch the news, you will often see stories about people who have been killed by their children or their spouse or their brother or sister, usually for money. It happens.

So, given this fact, what are we going to do: force everyone to die a terrible death because someone, somewhere, sometime, might try to influence someone to euthanize themselves?

If the rules for legal euthanasia are set up properly, the scheme will be as foolproof as anything that humans do usually is. And the idea that, if euthanasia is legalized, people everywhere will go about killing everyone in sight is profoundly stupid!

Here Wally (can I call you Wally?), I fixed your quote for you;
"No matter how you intellectualise trying to deny people a basic personal right at the expense of prolongued suffering under life support- within in a democratic society- at the whim of a superstition of supposed will of a deity held by a minority of one broader, but mostly secular religious group, it will never be right."

So, following Joe Loudmouth's advice, instead of normally ignoring the article after finding it was by the head of the Australian Christian Lobby, I read the whole damn thing, and am regretting wasting my time;
It is precisely as Pericles, PeterGM and JonJ described.

The only issue Wally raised was that some of the people who still seemed to have still requested euthanasia (at least all the cases Wally kind-of sort-of hinted whether consent was given), were not terminally ill, but suffering something that does not actually kill you, and as such, do not deserve the right to defy Wally's personal beliefs and end their own lives.

And Julia, surprise surprise, is showing her colors as just another slack gravy-train rider listening to lobbyists. The "Safeguards" she is ignorant about, she would have found out easily had she hauled her lazy backside over to her office intercom, and asked her secretary to mail her the Euthanasia policies already in use throughout Europe as a good place to start researching.

I just hope at least that since we have already cleaned the crud off this 'debate' just a week ago that nobody is going to try to pretend the supposed 'dangers' we already covered need to be asked again.

I don't want to see this get to the stage where people can pay a corrupt doctor to euthanase their parent or other, and have some legal excuse for it. There have been one or two people who have had their lives finished for no reason except I guess they were being "smart" or something. Those people who really want to finish themselves off, can fairly easily find a method to do so but the elderly and those in very poor health, may want a bit of help but I'm afraid I couldn't help, and probably would not.

David G,

<<the idea that, if euthanasia is legalized, people everywhere will go about killing everyone in sight is profoundly stupid>>

Yes, it is. Down with everybody who even thinks it. Wait a minute, I haven't heard anyone even suggest it. Yet. But I don't read every piece of Greens material :)

But if it becomes possible to kill just ONE person without their consent, for somebody to take somebody else's one-and-only life, then where are the boundaries ?

By all means, Pericles, health systems should provide as much palliative care as people want, and certainly as much pain relief as they want, self-administered if possible. People should spend their last months or days or moments in as much comfort and dignity as possible. But let people linger if they wish, when a little life is all they have left before they say goodbye forever to the world.

Joe

"What are the ISSUES ? ... And ultimately here, the issue is: do we choose life or death?"

No, the issue is: do I have the right to force my choice on somebody else? Do't like gay marriages? OK, don't have one. Don't like women priests? OK, don't become one. Don't want to die painlessly and with dignity when your time comes? OK, don't. But what makes you or anyone else think they have the right to elevate their personal choice to the status of an absolute rule for everyone? Why, religion, of course: because preventing other people from doing what they want to do is how religious people get their kicks.

As long as we have to pretend that irrational views deserve respect and consideration, then people are going to have to go on suffering for the sake of others' sense of self-righteousness.

King Hazza, "Here Wally (can I call you Wally?)"

As an internet warrior you can get away with calling Jim Wallace AM what you like.

http://dontworrysir.ytmnd.com/

From his very respectable service record it isn't something you might be inclined to do face to fact though:

"Jim Wallace AM ... was a career soldier for 32 years and a commander of Australia’s elite Special Forces. In 1984 he was made a Member of the Order of Australia for his services in developing Australia’s counter terrorist capability."

Few things destroy credibility as quickly as childish name calling and insults, especially where they are directed at a man with an exemplary record of service to his country.

I support euthanasia in principle, however like many others I struggle with the likely ethical implications for it in a country where discrimination against the aged is very active and widespread, the aged care system is broken and economics rules the political debate. The author is right to be concerned about depression in the elderly and ill and it is incredible that the Greens could constantly propose euthanasia while demonstrating no regard whatsoever for discrimination against the elderly.

http://www.ciap.health.nsw.gov.au/hospolic/stvincents/1993/a06.html

http://www.healthyplace.com/depression/elderly/depression-in-elderly/menu-id-68/

Cornflower is no doubt representative of a large portion of the community who feel conflicted about the euthanasia debate - I know I do. "Informed consent" is not an easy thing to objectively confirm, least of all when death is on the line. In our community there are many very well intentioned souls (Doctors and Nurses usually) who help accelerate the inevitable for the sick and infirm, usually in the guise of pain relief as part of palliative care. They have no 100% objective measure of "the right time", but I'm sure many families know what is going on and acquiesce - most likely out of love for the dying rather than naked avarice. Legislating to protect Doctors and Nurses in the above scenario would not be as simple as some might assume. And this is but one example of the grey zone that must be assessed and understood prior to making any rush to legislate. More debate is required so we don't create a truly flawed system.

http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=11043#184778

Clownfish, excellent point, but lost on the Radical, Extreme, Loony, Lefties from the Red/green/getup/labour Communist Coalition.

These "People" would be first in line to condemn Adolf Hitler for "Euthanizing" the "Useless Eaters" in the mid 1930's. A policy to free up public hospital beds or make health care more efficient, less expensive.

The last one of these debates was an article from one of the Red/greens who later commented on the article to that exact effect, namely saving taxpayers money on nursing homes for "redistribution" to some other allegedly more worthy cause like 3 world poverty or "Red/green Loans", which we know from decades of experience is totally wasted.

http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=11043#184798

Dear Joe Lane, Loadmouth, you can sometimes be surprisingly sensible for a Communist.

BTW, getting back to one of our earlier discussions that i never got around to finishing.

I would "defend to the death" your right to be an active member of http://www.socialist-alliance.org/ , run as one of their candidates, etc. I would also like to see the senate elected via pure proportional representation so that they could win some seats according to their % of the total national senate vote.

But 99-99% of Australia's CARS, Communist, Anarchist, Radical, Socialists did not do that. They pretended to be "Democratic Socialists" & joined the loony left ALP factions or pretended they are green & gained far more safe seats than their true popularity is worth.

Over the last 50 or so years many of these "Termites" have been destroying Australia from within. Exporting opportunities for Australia's children to China, or other Asian countries.

They have been engaging as 5th columnists in Cultural & Economic Terrorism & Treason. Like selling QR National to Foreign Multi Nationals.

I believe whatever political system one believes in you should be patriotic to your own country. Not try to arrange for other countries to take us over as the Red/green/getup/labour Communist coalition has been doing progressively for at least 50 years now.

The title references PM Gillard, but the bulk of the article is a tirade against medical graduates Dr Phillip Nitschke and Dr Bob Brown, and the Greens.

The euthanasia debate is about more than Phillip Nitschke's views, comments, actions or agenda.

It is about a small percentage of cases from a number of scenarios not catered for by optimal palliative care or other optimal medical therapy.

I'm so sorry Cornflower, being formerly part of the army separates someone from society and free speech standards to make fun of them, even if they make articles filled with blatant misinformation and slander against people who don't appreciate his authoritarian theological views, and also gives him permission to try to violate my rights through undemocratic lobbying so I conform to his superstitions?

Spare me the guilt trip, because I quite frankly owe Wally NOTHING. The reason is because he clearly would NOT have been fighting to uphold my freedoms because he has spent the past few years of his life lobbying for quite the opposite.

Well?

On another note, can we casually ignore the trolls who keep trying to build a Eugenics strawman? Or for that matter, pretend that it's not equally easy to fix an 'accidental' death of an elderly relative anyway?
Or for that matter, ignores hypothetical legislation that simply demands patient REQUEST?

What kind of rocks do these people crawl out of?

Here's a suggestion: why not start off legislating for suicide - self-inflicted, self-administered, involving no-one else, and subject to counselling ? Suppose we try this for a few years and see if and where there are legal difficulties and loopholes ?

i.e. to legalise situations where person A (and only person A) kills person A (and only person A) ?

Or is this too simple ?

Thanks, Formersnag, but I wouldn't want to join any group which was stupid enough to admit people like me. In any case, not joining would save the hassle of expulsion.

Joe

Firstly, I wish I could understand the posts by one under god.

Secondly, Gillard is simply keeping neutral on a very very touchy subject because she is holding onto power by a very very thin thread. Nothing more to it than that.

Thirdly, Everybody dies, it's just life. Surely people can have the right to choose how they die when they are already dying.

We are usually relieved to hear that someone who dies in an accident went instantly, without pain. Why would we then turn around and hope for the opposite for someone who is terminally ill?

Fortunately I have witnessed the passing of relatively few people, but I have never seen the 'good' death that some write about. I would berate and sack a farm worker who permitted any animal, farmed or feral to suffer the same.

I do not believe that the shackles of religious conviction or perverse stupidity are the stumbling blocks for the majority of people who are hesitant in supporting euthanasia at this stage. Religious edicts did nothing to prevent the sexual revolution and the use of the female contraceptive pill.

The aged are far and beyond the most numerous target of the euthanasia legislation, yet they are overwhelmingly opposed to it. It is reasonable to presume their opposition springs from distrust of the government because that is what they have said. That their distrust is well-based in fact is so obvious as to not require proof, but if any is needed, the long-standing discrimination by government against seniors in its own employment is an example. Worse is the hypocrisy that permits government to encourage the employment of seniors - who may only be in their early fifties - while conveniently disregarding the discrimination against seniors in its own employ to achieve economies, restructuring, affirmative action and so on.

Seniors must also believe that they exist in an environment where the 'old' are increasingly perceived as unproductive baggage to be carried by a society that even questions the worth of parenthood and children, where skilled labour can be easily imported, also acting a pressure valve for reckless fertility elsewhere.

In short, many citizens might want euthanasia to be available to them but see risks for themselves and their loved ones in a culture that is obviously does not value the aged and sees them as a burden and where government has well-earned reputation of cynicism, hypocrisy, obfuscation and inaction in policy affecting the aged.

DavidG, your strawman is pathetic.

Force *everyone* 'to die a terrible death'? Where did I ever say that? Does *everyone* die a terrible death, without euthanasia? But then, if every death is terrible, isn't euthanasia therefore terrible?

'If the rules for legal euthanasia are set up properly'. Ha ha, a very big if.

'if euthanasia is legalized, people everywhere will go about killing everyone in sight'. No, I never said that at all. However, from what I have personally witnessed (which is, of course, anecdotal only I'll concede), and from what evidence has shown in the past (witness, for instance, the unusual spike in deaths *after* death duties were abolished in the 70s), *some* people *will* place undue pressure on 'burdensome' relatives to get rid of themselves.

Maybe you find that an acceptable collateral damage, I don't.

Yes, sometimes terminally ill people die awful deaths, and yes, it may be better *sometimes* to spare people prolonged and hopeless suffering.

And yet, and yet ...

Clownfish, you weren't here for the other Euthanasia thread were you?
Your arguments and presumptions clearly show someone who has not been keeping up with further enhancements in the debate, because most of your questions had been painstakingly addressed many, many times previously..

So far for you, it seems that it's more worthwhile to force some people who would willingly choose to end their lives humanely due to being rendered in a physically intolerable state (to them) to instead be forced to linger in a bed, than to risk the spook scenario of naughty inlaws encouraging their sick relos into offing themselves slightly earlier- as opposed to, you know, discretely killing them and claiming it was an accident- which, in such a state, anyone would immediately believe possible.
Am I right?

to/quote..the trash/can-man<<..We are usually..relieved/to-hear>>>think/why...that is true

read the death notices
passed peacefully in their sleep...is euthanism for youth-in asia..

to wit they died dopped to the eyeballs..
thus many/arnt even aware...their spirit..has passed over

thus dwell for ages in the next astral realm...
completly aware they been tricked/decieved..the normal course of dying

every death has its pains..[we have learned palitive...care..for pain managment..has its chronic-pain..they simply cant cure

think of how they kill/people with the 3 needles?..in usa
one to immobelise their atomouse system..so they dont thrash arround/another for the pain..for those wanting to thrash and/in pain...then another injection to stop the heart

but there is no clean death

peacefull does not translate into easy

<<that someone/who dies..in an accident went instantly,without pain.>>is a complete deciet...

they dont know...
imagine the pain..you felt..
being desribed as passing peacefully...how would you feel?

<<Why would/we..then turn around..and hope-for..the opposite for someone..who is terminally ill?>>...yes your totally right....lol

if only dying..was as simple..as you seem to think
do you still believe in father x-mass?
the easter bunny..the tooth-fairy

you think they dreamed the death..by needle..
death sentance up..from nothing?

or from standard/operating procedure?
for those doing their..duty..in the dark-of night?

oh yes maam..he passed-away[to where?].. peacfully..
in his drug induced sleep

is now completly unaware...he is even dead

[completly ignorant..his spirit.. might*-be tied to his..dead body
for years till it..{the body}..disolves away]..in some cases

recently..in israel...hospitals went on strike
the death toll miraculously fell
go figure why

yes its a bad job watching people die
even worse..is trying to be helping them...into suffering..beyond human asistance

issues we have
are more easilly resolved here
in this realm..than in the next

DEAD is NOT DEAD
however much they/might decieve..you
to think/its all over..or done the easy-way..

easy for who?

de-nial..is more than a river in egypt
docters/nurses are guessing..ok educated guessing..
and in the main with good intentions..

but your job is either pain managmnent..or curing
not euthinisation...either all life is sacred..or its not

Humanities rights have long been restricted by religiously driven dogma.

As society has evolved, the world has moved from a world dominated by "thy shalt not" to one where individual human rights are recognised, people have been allowed to choose for themselves.

Homosexuality used to be illegal, as divorce. As humanity gains the right to live as they choose, it is inevitable that they should desire to choose how to live the last few months.

i recently participated..in a near/death..discussion..show will-be..on Friday 8th/at 8.30pm...aired..in brisbane..31 QCTV

some/of..the issues raised here...
are discussed there

there is a lot more to living...
and the way we die..than casual opinion can rectify...

[in fact many/topics fall into..the grey-zone]
thats what the program will/be called

there will be a discussion/link
so bring your/opinions there

its sad many/truelly-good..people really believe..death is it
there-is so much more/than this mere material incarnation

but so much..fits into the grey-area..of opinion
when we/should..be deciding things/based-on fact

King Hazza, stop misrepresenting what I say.

I never said relatives will actively murder the elderly, but they *will* put the hard word on grandma to sign off on the euthanasia permit. I've seen the sordid depths to which peoples' treatment of their elderly relatives will descend.

I wish I could share the view from your ivory tower, but unfortunately I've been down in the mire of real life.

"Yes, sometimes terminally ill people die awful deaths, and yes, it may be better *sometimes* to spare people prolonged and hopeless suffering," Clownfish says. You are making real progress, Clownfish.

I've watched three people who I loved die terrible deaths and I am determined that it won't happen to me.

What would really push this issue in the right direction would be if the relatives of each person who died a terrible, agonizing, slow death could sue those who are responsible for engaging in deliberate, pointless cruelty.

http://www.dangerouscreation.com

you have my respect...david

and i comprehend...your rejection of religeons
but not that of..the higher-power..living inside us all

sadly...the many religeons have decieved many away from love[grace/mercy/good..etc..

and/that we/all..are the embodyment..of the holy-spirit

i can agree/with..the many topics you/raise..at your blog

and have no doudt that in time..you will be recieving..the rewards/fruits...that come from..unselfishly..giving the aid and compassion..which/you clearly give freely..

but by the picture..at the head/of..your link
i note..your seeing only/half..of the bigger-picture

that has nought to/do with religeon..
yet much to do with our works

at this link
http://www.jhardaker.plus.com/pdf/

there is a pdf....
http://www.jhardaker.plus.com/pdf/The%20Gate%20of%20Heaven.pdf

in it early..is a picture...
[i couldnt/..but..compare/to..the one heading your link]

there is also another picture...here..[at this link]
http://www.jhardaker.plus.com/pdf/Gone%20West.pdf
[in chapter..viii..[a plan of the sopirit-realm]

i would post them..in reply to your's
but prefer..if you do...[its your blog]..
or not..its your call

i suggest your..clearly seeing/half the picture
they would look better..on one page

[in your case..
your clearly..headed..to this realm
http://www.jhardaker.plus.com/pdf/Through%20the%20Mists.pdf

i just thought..i should prepare you...
just in case

anyhow im going back...to read more of yours

will you try/to see...
the pictures at mine?

i would appriciate..your feed-back
anyhow cheers eh

your doing..of good works
despite your/not..doing it..to gain extra/points...

is regarded in high-esteem..in-deed...
thank-you for being you

cheers eh

Nice try at applying a latte-sipper slur Clown- Wally would be proud of you.

But explain how there can even be an 'ivory tower' in this issue as opposed to a 'real world' from MY position?

Anyway, you should read up on the previous Euthanasia discussions and get back later- don't bother replying until you can actually quote one of the many answers to your silly strawmen.

Then again, you can even explain why the fictitious spook story you gave is worth the suffering of hundreds, maybe thousands of others in this country each year? Especially when I already told you there are easier ways to kill Grandma immediately and get away with it (if, for some reason the relatives can't bear waiting), and that the worst of this scenario is that Grandma felt pressured or obligated to off herself?

Also, check on some answers that address these as well, I advise a website called 'Google'.

One under god, we inhabit different worlds though I understand yours very well because once I was a believer.

Eventually I escaped from the world of superstition and theo-babble and since that time, I have lived happily in the real world knowing that there is no god or life after death.

I visited your blog and commend you on its sincerity. Though we are worlds apart we do share a common purpose: that of making the world a better place.

It's just that we use different methods and I would not seek to convince you that your beliefs do not accord with scientific knowledge or any meaningful evidence.

Cheers.

P.S. A few photographs might add some colour to your blog. Just a suggestion.

its not my blog/david

im guessing you only visited the first link

i was once like you
just as much..as you claim to have been like me

once we were/much the same
but now our roles have inverted

what have you to fear from god
i can comprehend turning against religion..
and those claiming ...to be 'saved'..
yet via their works proove far away from good[god]

its funny and sad...you chose to bind your self
to those preaching the very./.deceptions you rejected

anyhow your young/yet
keep the love in your heart
at leadt look at the pictures in the 2...3 rd links

the last link
well let that be a surprise...for you
[i will be the one saying i told you so]

anyhow in-case i dont get to say so then

realise what you really are
is a spirit...having a life/experience

Let me give/you..the outline of a parable
over which you may reflect..until someone-else is-sent to afford you clearer..information.

Children are coaxed..to sleep/on earth..by the singing/of nursery rhymes,..the fabulous-heroes..of which become historical-characters in..the minds..of..the little listeners,

until the realities/of life..dispel..the illusion.

So children/of-a..larger/growth,[aage]. upon entering this/life,
find that..even/so...they/too..have they been lulled..
into spiritual slumber/by the fictions..of the nurses[priests]..of their souls.[and..science-athiests]

It is/the..awakening to the/truth..of this fact/which
makes..this..a land of/surprises,,..as you will find-it..to be/as..you proceed.

In the..doctrine/that..the soul has to/make..its eternal and final choice on earth,..rather than/that..being the elementary-stage of its unending/development.

The legitimate duty..of earth/is to ground..the soul..in the practical-principles..of love,..

in order to fit-it..for its entrance/
upon the higher duties..of this estate.

Abstract..speculations/in..theology
are/not the studies..man is called upon to undertake,..
especially when his teachers..work upon indefinite/theories,..and have no absolute knowledge.

Shadow Minister, "As society has evolved, the world has moved from a world dominated by 'thy shalt not' to one where individual human rights are recognised, people have been allowed to choose for themselves."

The pendulum swings strongly towards much less privacy and freedom than in (say) the Seventies. For example, there is now a horde of public servants who can enter my property at will and some can even tell me what to do with it. What about the freedoms we have all lost - necessary they say to combat terrorism. Then there is the Nanny State, egged on by political correctness and hysteria (which seems endemic in Australia society and growing).

I'd say we have lost freedoms and privacy rather than gaining any, although for a short space of time it seemed the other way. That is not to say that John Howard's affirmation of our secular State wasn't welcome.

I will resist putting forward another 'more democracy/CIR' lecture;

But the nanny state (with Euthanasia at the very top and every other absurd personal limitation to placate the wowsers) must be put in the dustbin of history, and the sooner, the better.

What sort of families do you people live in that you would be pushing grandma into signing off her euthanasia permission slip?

Are there really families like that? If so, I admit to being a bit naive...

Trashcan, having worked in Aged Care for many years, I can assure you there are many more 'Grandmas and Grandpas" out there wanting euthanasia for themselves than there are family members trying to knock them off.

It doesn't matter how wonderful the aged care facilities or their staff are, or how effective the palliative care facilities are, many elderly people would rather not be here once they get to a dependent or painful existence.

If I had a dollar for the number of times over the years that I have been asked by aged or dying patients to 'please end all this for me Sister', I would be very rich indeed.

On the other hand I still remain a little worried over how any legal euthanasia requests will physically be carried out, and when.
On previous euthanasia threads no one ever answered this.

Obviously Doctors will have to prescribe and give the final medications to the patients. At present the AMA (Australian Medical Association) does not support this act by their members.

Many Doctors aren't comfortable with the notion of euthanasia on request. If your own GP is one of these then you would have to go out 'shopping' for a GP who would. This may be difficult to find, especially if you are terminally ill.

While some medical staff already 'assist' those in their last difficult days of life to 'pass on' a little faster, if they are having terrible pain, nausea or vomiting that can't be controlled, this is a far easier act of compassion to attend to than euthanasing someone who is terminally ill, but not in any distress and just lying there looking at you calmly?

I don't doubt that there are a number of people in very poor health that would prefer to be be euthanased rather than keep living in pain, but is it likely that somebody else may receive that death sentence if not enough care is taken. There have been instances quoted in the news, of several people disposing of their parents, and although I realise that it is not very often, once is too much, isn't it. It is a problem that would be foolish and very dangerous to pursue in parliament.

Indeed Trashcanman I believe everyone here, and definitely myself included, share your naivety for such families.
-
Merv,
So Merv, by your logic we should ban cars and public transport because some people die in road accidents?

Or maybe ban people from being allowed to take painkillers, headache tablets and other medicines that are an overdose risk?

Just to be sure?

Your majesty,

Re your response to Merv, we can all play that logic-game: are YOU suggesting that if anyone runs someone else down with their car, that should always be treated as an accident ?

Many of us who have reservations about the practicability of euthanasia are fairly comfortable with straight-out suicide. We are not comfortable with murder. The difficulty is to differentiate the two conclusively. Running someone down with a car is relatively uncomplicated.

Surprisingly, it sometimes is a bad, bad world. I know this comes as a shock to many people, but there ARE some people with naughtiness, even evil, in their hearts. That such wickedness could be ! But yes, it can, so how do we distinguish one type of death from another ? Voluntary from involuntary, if you like ?

So why not push for legalising suicide first, before we go down the various paths justifying the involvement of other people in someone's death ? See how that goes first, say for five or ten years ?

Joe

"If you really want to release economic rationalism on the frail aged, give them euthanasia" - Tony Abbott expressing his sincere concern that a future government, confronted by the costs of palliative care, might not allocate funds in the expectation that the frail aged might make the choice of resolving the problem for themselves.

Tony Abbott: should euthanasia be legalised? | Fora Radio | 11 February 2009

http://www.abc.net.au/4corners/content/2010/s2846418.htm

The Gillard government has relegated the aged to a shared sub-portfolio with Mental Health. Mental health is topical and a subject that will attract a lot of interest and questions, occupying the minister and senior bureaucrats. This indicates a lesser concern with the needs of the aged, in an environment where the ageing of the population is seen as creating serious challenges, drains in fact, for a number of heads of expenditure.

Regardless of ageism being far more prevalent and untreated compared with other areas of discrimination, it does not attract a Commissioner to advocate for the rights of seniors. A Commissioner for the Aged is overdue for the protection of the aged, but it is crucial if euthanasia is to be approved.

A federal Commissioner for the Aged is far more necessary than (say) a Sex Discrimination Commissioner where large gains have been made and corrective measures have been in place for a very long time.

PeterGM,
I'd like those who oppose euthanasia be made to attend those ill people. You'd be surprised how quickly they'd come to support it.

yes individual...you are/correct...watching..some-one die..is/traumatic..[to say/the least]..

but while..the issue of-this topic...i suppose its/more..about fed/govt..being able-to overide..decisions of the act/nt

there i would say..not

of course/if..the issue is
can docters kill people...i say no

we hear much lately..in the news/about..how accident'victims'..are in a med-induced coma...[as far-as..i am willing-to..let docter's..go]

lets say that docters/can dull physical pain
they are completly inept..to judge mental pains

the cure for mental-pain..[in the after-realms..is sleep]

so we return to coma..requiring pallitive care..[or bed occupation if you like]...then it becomes a matter of money/beds/staff

and of course others needs/wants/desires

no one knows best /what is best for any-other..[including govt]

people little realise...that in applying to vote...
we are giving-up..our powers of atourney...
to those claiming the majority of the vote/

i dont trust those..you voted for..to/do the right thing/thus give them..no extra powers..over living nor dying

all death is only a transition..into further living

yet athiests believe..[as they may]..one shot[at life]..then nothing

its not a simple/issue..
but docters are sworn to relieve suffering[under oath]..
to whom much is given/much is expected

im fortuinatly..not paid to relieve pain
or decide life..and who shal die questions
[war is hell..govts shouldnt send kids to die]

govts have long ago stopped serving the trust[the people]...
who gave them special power..[to be honest over half/are or were lawyers...and are/only..serving the party-line..or doing as/their true masters..[the public service/party sponcers..decree..or..[tell them to/do]

docters should not be licenced to kill..[for any reason]

so any legislation should decree..and euthinasia/victim..
is not to be vandelised..for organ harvest[for egsample]..as the phantom-pains..can haunt/organs

science has found/ways to destinguish hauntings[mental pain events /from real physical-pain events]..or at least cast-out demons/but..that line of research has long/ago..been abandoned[read 30 years ammoung the dead]

anyhow to kill for love/
is possably the moral event of our times
so much depends on
..who/is doing the killing..for what reason

and till we can make that..fail-proof..
its unlikely..we/they..can resolve the real-issues

[those..we have given..so much/to...
in reality..have so little to/give]

just when i think/..to have said my final say..in the issue..
[i get further/..guidence]

timming is everything...lol

but to quote..<<For all/these..things
those who/are responsible..must-be..brought to..judgment...>>and/or reward..

<<true/“Guilt..must/be righteously punished,>>of equal measure

<<while the...excess/of pain..which the victim..has endured/
must receive..its legitimate compensation...>>

<<With the/punishment..we..have nothing to do,..
<<the/natural-law of this life..is fully adequate to that,..
<<and every guilty soul..will reap the..just*/harvest..of the seed he/has sown.

<<It is/that..>>that<<we/may..take part..in the compensation/..that we are..here.>>...

extracted from..through the mists..
http://www.jhardaker.plus.com/pdf/Through%20the%20Mists.pdf

continues..

<<Justice demands/that..an instant*liberation..shall-be given..
<<from those bonds..and life/must-be*..lavished upon the sufferers..
<<until we have helped to/build up..and invigorate their/souls,..then each-one..shall reach the full-development..for which/it-was..design[ed]..and for which/..it wept..and struggled,..but was..<<or may/have-been<<..prevented..by action of oppressors.”>>

<,“But where/do-we..find mercy and forgiveness..
in the administration/of..such inexorable/justice?”..I asked.>>

“Every attribute of/God..has its legitimate-sphere of operation,”..he replied,

<<“and the/inviolate-maintenance..of each/in its appointed order..is essential to the continuance of the/almighty..and all-wise perfection..of our Father,..but it is impossible for any one of these..to/usurp..the jurisdiction/of..another.>>

<<..Suppose,..for a moment,..that mercy was allowed to..withstand justice
and prevail..in any single instance;..the immediate result would/be..an/injustice;>>

<<since to/show mercy..to the offender..
would be an injustice to/the offended,..unless,in turn,..you show him..mercy too.>>

<<Carry this/to-its logical sequence ..and you will be/compelled..to abolish justice in favour of mercy,..in which case..punishment and retribution..would become..an impossibility;..law..would be a dead-letter,..

and sin,..freed from fear or/restraint,..would revel..in its license.>>end/quote

now licence...[mean's..permission..to do that otherwise..unlawfull]

i hesitate to give anyone...licence to kill

by the same licence..
no one..has the right..to allow suffering

[especially them/those..who have taken oath/..and
gained licence..to heal]

to you..having/been..given..so little..
be gratefull...

None of us operate in a vacuum, and the simple fact that lobbyists are working to pressure government is proof in itself that community exists, and that community values are important.
Therefore, those opposing formalising euthanasia legislation cannot be summarily dismissed as hopelessly uninformed busybodies.

Community values influence, profoundly, the choices that are set before us in the first place.
For each of my own three pregnancies, I have been recommended for Down Syndrome screening. It is standard medical protocol.
The idea is that if my foetus (baby) is found to have a high likelihood of Down syndrome, I will have the 'opportunity' or 'choice' to abort the baby.

When the government of the day legislated for legal abortion back in the day, was screening for disabled children presented as part of the package? Or doesn't that matter?

When women who are presented with the prospect of a Downs Syndrome child, more than 90 per cent exercise their 'choice' of aborting their child.

I wonder how many of these mothers have mixed feelings about the abortion, but follow through because the price of 'opting out' is too high, either socially, or financially.

What of the woman who would like to keep the child, but aborts because her partner, or extended family, is against the child?

What of the woman who keeps the child, in the face of such opposition?

And, what, also, of the government and social attitudes towards the Downs Syndrome children who find themselves alive after the screening process? How has 'individual choice' affected society's attitudes towards them?

During each of my screening procedures, I knew - by virtue of statistics alone - that I would be expected to abort if the information of Downs was presented to me. The medical fraternity approaches the screening process with this outcome in mind.

How, then, will euthanasia procedures slide to reflect community, rather than individual 'business'?

“The aged are far and beyond the most numerous target of the euthanasia legislation, yet they are overwhelmingly opposed to it”

Cornflower, you must occupy a culture vastly different from that of myself: with 79 years behind me, and a large spread of contacts aged +/- a decade or so from my own, the overwhelming evidence among these people is for politicians to butt-out from prohibition of medical assistance for a decent exit, released from severe torturing on their journey towards death.

Individual,

The point is, for Christ's sake, what the hell do you MEAN by euthanasia ? Suicide ? 'Assisted' suicide ? The killing of one person by another who is incapable of doing it themselves, even incapable of moving, even incapable of expressing their intentions, killing for all sorts of incredibly noble and grand reasons ? 'Putting people out of their misery', whether they know it, or want it, or not ? Helping people 'die with dignity', etc. etc. etc.

Why can't some people on this thread see the gradations between:

* outright suicide, one person killing themselves with no other person's involvement;

* through to the involvement of others to set up a suicide situation;

* to the provision of Wills authorising doctors to administer a lethal dose;

* to the actual killing of one person by others, for all manner of humane reasons;

* to the mercy killing of someone in intense, unrelievable pain;

* to the 'dying with dignity' situation of patients with dementia;

* right up to killing people off because the hospital needs the bed,

* or because someone has reached a statutory age (i.e. yours, dear reader) ?

And all of these issues overlap issues of palliative care and pain relief, which may have the effect of hastening death.

But the instant that a second person is involved, the situation is changed from one of autonomy, self-determination, choice, to POTENTIALLY a situation which is much more ambiguous, in which (progressively, through the examples above) the possibility that somebody does NOT want to die increases, and the involvement of other people opens the door progressively to POSSIBLE criminal activity.

It's not all open-and-shut, by any means. We can't let emotion mask a lack of definition, folks.

Joe

It's not all open-and-shut, by any means. We can't let emotion mask a lack of definition, folks.
Loudmouth,
Precisely ! I for one & I'm sure many others too, would not like to linger on in agony or otherwise pointless, devoid of quality existence & depend on people who don't have any other interest in prolonging a miserable situation other than for a job.
Those who constantly cry poor this'n that are the very ones who stay as far away from that situation as possible. How'd you feel if some all his life useless drug addict were to demand that you look after him for a basic wage ? If it were a decent human being who is a member of your family than you'd do it no questions asked, apart from expecting the taxpayer to give carer's allowance. If someone commits suicide then they obviously weren't happy with the place or people around them. If someone is so ill that they can't commit suicide then help them if they want to. It's easier said than done but I'd think I'd rather get put down then be a burden on someone I love or very much care for. Remember that compassion is merely a luxury when we can afford it or we expect others to have it for us. The reality of it all is that people refuse to accept realty when it doesn't go by the text books.
Where is this compassion when it's needed whilst people could still enjoy a quality of life ? Will JG compensate pensioners when their superannuation gets ripped off ? Will JG show compassion when greedy banks repossess family homes due to bureaucratic incompetence ? In my opinion it is the ultimate selfishness to ask someone to look after a seriously permanently ill to sacrifice their quality of life just to prolong someone else's misery. By insisting to keep a severely incapacitated person in a state of pointless existence is creating a pointless existence for the carer also.

Individual,

<<In my opinion it is the ultimate selfishness to ask someone to look after a seriously permanently ill to sacrifice their quality of life just to prolong someone else's misery. By insisting to keep a severely incapacitated person in a state of pointless existence is creating a pointless existence for the carer also.>>

That may be so, palliative care must be physically and mentally exhausting, but carers can always walk away, at least in theory: it still should be up to the person concerned whether OR NOT they want to die. We each have a right to be a nuisance as long as possible for our children, and to have spent every last cent of whatever we have accumulated, if we wish. IF WE WISH. But I would rather that everyone was in the situation where nobody could off them, to use King Hazza's tactful phrase, and get away with it.

So what are the limits to euthanasia ? Beyond what point does it become murder ? Surely there is one ? Or in some people's brave new world, there is no such point ?

Joe

I found it interesting in your post individual, that euthanasia moved from something a person could desire for themselves, to spare themselves constant intense pain, to something that could be desired to spare others a drudgery.
And, yes, I understand that carers are completely marginalised by our system.

Individual, "...depend on people who don't have any other interest in prolonging a miserable situation other than for a job."

Euthanasia isn't and shouldn't be considered for the well-being of the carer, only for the patient.

There are many cases for euthanasia, which I support. But your particular argument isn't a valid one for this debate. Likewise, one wouldn't argue against euthanasia for the sake of saving jobs...

And drug addicts are people too. I'm fairly certain most carers in the industry wouldn't be making such a distinction in their job.

So what are the limits to euthanasia ? Beyond what point does it become murder ?
Loudmouth,
I appreciate your question as this is indeed the crux of Euthanasia. We must however, not lose sight of where we're heading as a society. We cannot afford both physically & psychologically to become a society of carers because that's what's around the corner if modern medicine keeps focussing on extended life expectancy rather than quality of life. Yes there are many who object to euthanasia on the grounds that medicine will find cures & people will live better & longer. But who'll be there to support this extended life ? Don't bet on Governments for they already cringe at the mention of pension. Family ? Perhaps in some isolated cases but if the present is used as a gauge then I won't hold my breath. It literally comes down to acceptable moral of do we provide medical help up to a certain age only & let nature take over or do we go against nature & our concept of moral & prolong life which can not sustain itself without extensive effort & sacrifice. Many patients just lie in hospital beds simply waiting to pass on and/or even against the patient's will our morals will not allow them to go with dignity. Are our morals such that we even go against nature & against a patient's last wish ? We bail up when it comes to the end of peoples' life but we ignore their plight throughout life. I find this very strange indeed.

I must be a bit of a b@stard because, even though I'm heading there myself pretty soon, I don't spend sleepless nights worrying about how undignified it must be for old people to be spoon-fed, insensate and incontinent, in the corridors of over-crowded old people's homes. I don't weep into my latte about the vast numbers of people spending their last months in unbearable pain. Instead, I look down from my Olympian ivory tower and contemplate where the boundaries between suicide and murder (or manslaughter) may be.

Suicide I'm fine with, but that Other Person's involvement in something that might be murder or at least manslaughter, I'm not.

Yes, I must be a proper b@stard: I don't care if I'm a nuisance to my children, I don't care if I crap myself and need feeding, and am oblivious to it all. It's my life, my only life, and nobody else has the right to take it, not on any spurious grounds of 'dignity', or saving me unbearable pain (gimme the morphine pump!), or any bullsh!t about quality of life.

So where is the boundary between choice and not-choice ? Simple question. Or is it ?

Joe

So where is the boundary between choice and not-choice ? Simple question. Or is it ?
Loudmouth,
It's your life, you do with it as you please. Just don't expect others to change their routine to accommodate your needs. If you need help & you don't want your carer to feel undignified then pay them properly. if you can't pay expect not live much longer. Very simple indeed.

colinsett, "Cornflower, you must occupy a culture vastly different from that of myself..."

Congratulated on being 79 and being able to boast of your large spread of contacts, with none suffering depression, I hope. However, if you take the trouble to go back and read my posts on this subject you will realise that I am basing my comments on what Michael O'Neill, CEO National Seniors, had to say in his address at the National Press Club in the last couple of weeks. National Seniors has several hundred thousand members plus and the survey of its members showed 75% opposed to euthanasia and for the reasons I have stated previously.

The lack of reporting of Mr O'Neill's address says something too about the callous disregard of the problems affecting the aged. It is different of course where there is some political advantage in fomenting intergenerational jealousy to the detriment of the aged and especially 'Boomers'.

If you also take the trouble to read and understand what I have said many times over, I am not opposed to euthanasia. Rather I am very much for it. What I am doing is making a plea for government and the community to address the prejudice against the aged that is a growing feature of Australian culture and permits the widespread ageism - discrimination against the aged - and a broken aged care system to prevail.

The plea is for seniors to be treated decently. Now that might not be something you and your contacts think is much of a priority, but it is a very poor environment in which to introduce euthanasia. It is fundamental reason why many seniors do not trust government - a distrust you have acknowledged. As the alternative Prime Minister has been so honest to identify, economic rationalism could easily affect the services available to seniors should euthanasia become available.

What doesn't figure is why you and the Greens are not as concerned to demand the removal of the systemic discrimination against the aged as you are to make euthanasia urgently available to them.

Now I'm confused, Cornflower.

Your first reference to Michael O'Neill's speech went as follows:

>>...his comment that around 75% of his members aged 50 years and above would vote against euthanasia through distrust and fear of government<<

OK, that's a valid view. They might well do so, if they were surveyed. But it is only his opinion, is it not. Which might well be influenced by political considerations.

But that conjecture now seems to have turned into a fact.

>>National Seniors has several hundred thousand members plus and the survey of its members showed 75% opposed to euthanasia<<

According to this, they did actually vote. If you are able to provide a link or a reference, this would significantly tilt the argument.

A situation where the general populace, en masse, believes that euthanasia should be legalised (the stats seem to settle around the 80% mark), while 75% of those most likely to be affected in the near term believe otherwise, should be widely publicized.

I have tried to track down the speech myself, but only came up with this:

http://www.medicalsearch.com.au/News/-Super-style-plan-needed-for-aged-care-seniors-group-46948

Nothing at all about euthanasia.

Which, as you say, represents a "callous disregard of the problems affecting the aged"

Do you have more information that you can share with us?

OOPS/posted...this
to..the wrong/thread
http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=11008&page=0

how we/have gotten..things so-wrong
[or/..making miracles happen]

quote
http://www.jhardaker.plus.com/pdf/Through%20the%20Mists.pdf

<<Surely you/do-not..believe..
in..the literal/fulfilment..of that promise?”

“There are/mountains physical,..mental..and spiritual,”..he/replied,

“and the..latter-are..quite/as difficul..to remove
as/the former,perhaps even more so..and require..equally..
the power/of God,..but it..can/be done.

Have you not/just..witnessed..
the removal/of mountains of/deformity?”

“I have..indeed.”

“How was/it..accomplished?”..he asked.

“NOT/by..the assembling/together..of the great..congregation and singing..‘We can/..do nothing,..nothing!’..
as our brethren on/earth are taught/to do;

they came[toghether]..to work,..and that every-soul..
did its/utmost..[which]..was attested..by the result.

Before..Siamedes/proffered..the invocation,
which secured..that visible/response,
he had/assured himself..that his...
and their..unaided powers/were put forth..and exhausted!

;..and being..confident/that..of himself..he could do/no-more,

he invoked..the strength..which was beyond/and above;
and God would..have broken troth..if He had/not..honoured such faith.

He had/not to detail..his desires,[nor]..elaborate his/wish,
or discourse..on the benefits..and glory to/accrue;

his cry..was..a prophetic thanksgiving

for the strength..he and..every soul...
*knew ..would/be given..to them

he was..conscious/of..the fact
that his/requirements..were already known.

Everything which/could-be..done..in this hall..was completed
and there was..a pause..in the/service,..an interval
only to be..terminated by Divine action;

and the waiting/faith..of the-multitude/
captured..that action..by storm.

God had/not power..to tarry/when assailed..by/such..an-other serving-force, therefore that/sign..descended..and with-it
the necessary energy..to continue..the/work
they had..so confidently/undertaken.

It might..and should be-so..on earth,
but instead/of healing..they..inflict most-grievous wounds
and then..send/the sufferers..here..for remedy.”

“They have not/the..opportunity..even..if..they had/the power
to do..what I have witnessed/here,”..I ventured/to remark.

“God is too..wise and just,”..he answered,
“to require or expect..any/man..to perform..an/impossibility.

But in those/things..which..are well/within..their capacity
[to]-do..men work/according to that-rule/of faith..
which you have/seen exemplified?

Nay verily!

Rather,..forgetting that/they..[earthers]..are called-to
the high privilege/of..being workers..together/with God,

as/you have-seen..illustrated,..they have-been..educated into
the practice of/doing..nothing but/asking God..to do it/all.

When God works..for man it/is always
in conjunction..with man;

it is/no canon..of Divine-law
that the master..shall do/all the labour
while..the servant/gives..the/orders.

When you ask..God to-lay..the corner-stone,
you may rest assured..that He will wait/..for you
to get..the foundations ready*.

But the...earth idea.../of the matter..
is that/..a man has/nothing to do
but to tell God..what he wants
and then wait...lol..
for it to/be done,>>

dont/say you wernt/told

Pericles, "If you are able to provide a link or a reference, this would significantly tilt the argument."

Did you happen to go to the National Press Club site, I did mention that is where O'Neill gave his address?

I also apologised in a previous comment on the subject that I couldn't link directly to the subject National Press Club (NPC) speech because it was only available to members of the NPC, or for a fee. See here,
http://www.npc.org.au/upcomingspeakers/transcriptorderform.html

That is why I also think that it is unfortunate that his address wasn't published by the mainstream media.

In lieu of that you could refer to the 7.30 Report's interview on 14 September 2010 because from what I heard him say, much of his address was based on that.
http://www.abc.net.au/7.30/content/2010/s3011781.htm

BTW, I did not, as you claim, say that euthanasia itself represented a callous disregard of the problems of the aged.

Pericles,

Just to add, as I recall the survey of National Seniors' members' views on euthanasia and the reasons for those views were mentioned in a reply to a question from Laurie Wilson, who is a director of the NPC. The NPC address was delivered on 22 September 2010.

What's the demographic of the National Seniors?

(apart from not being spring chickens...)

No more did I, Cornflower.

>>BTW, I did not, as you claim, say that euthanasia itself represented a callous disregard of the problems of the aged.<<

I lifted the phrase straight from your previous post:

>>The lack of reporting of Mr O'Neill's address says something too about the callous disregard of the problems affecting the aged<<

So, you and I are 100% agreed that a poll that shows such a massive discrepancy between the views of the "general public", and those most affected, should be widely publicised.

All we need to do now is to track it down, is that not right?

>>Did you happen to go to the National Press Club site<<

Yes. But this is all I could find.

http://www.npc.org.au/speakerarchive/mike-oneill.html

But presumably, you know from "somewhere" that:

>>National Seniors has several hundred thousand members plus and the survey of its members showed 75% opposed to euthanasia<<

Where did you find this information?

Surely something this important should not be ignored.

You would think that a claim that 75% of people over 50 would vote against euthanasia when 80% of the population support it would raise some questions, Cornflower.

Anyway, who cares! Even if 95% of people opposed it, it should be available for those who want it or need it!

Visit a hospice where people are dying terrible deaths or vomiting up feces and you might change your mind!

Every human should have the right to die when they choose without pain and with dignity.

It's an individual's right, one that shouldn't be decided by the sheeple!

I'm with David G. on this one. If I have a willing medico lined up (and I am very strict on not coercing medical staff into anything that they would be uncomfortable with) then it's nobody's business but mine and theirs if I am terminally ill and avoiding pain in my last weeks.

Why should I be treated as an idiot because I am terminally ill and unable to make up my own mind? My family are not murdering so and so's but would respect my wishes. Saying 'but giving you this right, might mean that other people are abused' is like saying 'that we will now have to outlaw all pain relief because some people might abuse the right to use it' - and heavens above, become addicted even.

Probably the most peculiar claim that has been made in relation to this debate is that it's okay for me to kill myself (suicide) early rather than have a nice, clean, hospital or hospice death when I was ready, if I wanted it which I might not if I found my illness bearable.

TBC

I hope the people who push this view are ready to open up their lounge rooms and offices in for people with terminal illness to come and top themselves in.

That's OUTRAGEOUS I can hear some people say. Well not really. If I have to kill myself early which would annoy me and my family very much because I'd lose time with them, no matter how I did it, then some poor soul have to clean up the mess. Why should some poor bush-walker have their day ruined and maybe even suffer some emotional hurt because some intrusive types think that this is better than dying in hospital.

Then I might blotch it, end up incapicated early which would be both expensive to the state and terrible on my family.

Then there would be the legal complications, things like the impact on my life insurance and probably the coroner's court to add stress to my family. So nope, if I have to go early and luckily for the fanatics out there that would intrude on my rights, I am in reasonable health, I would seriously consider dropping my corspe on someone who I think would deserve to deal with it, than someone who hasn't impeded on my choice at all.

Pericles,

It is disingenuous of you to insist there is no difference between the statement I made and what you claimed I said. Most readers would have no difficulty understanding the difference. However if it suits you to muddy the waters to bolster your argument, so be it, your loss.

Pericles, "So, you and I are 100% agreed that a poll that shows such a massive discrepancy between the views of the 'general public', and those most affected, should be widely publicised."

No, you are comparing apples and oranges, I referred to a quote regarding the opinions of the members of National Seniors, whereas the poll to which you refer could involve anyone, for example a high number of young people if done on line. Would you like to link to your poll?

As for your remaining questions see my replies already given above,
3 October 2010 8:14:00 PM and
3 October 2010 8:29:50 PM

There is no secret, it is quite straightforward and easy, just get your copy of the transcript from the National Press Club as suggested to you and as they offer (I gave you the link to the request form). The link you posted above was the introduction for Mr O'Neill, a promo, not a transcript of his address. Did you not realise that? They do it for all speakers. It is delivered by the President of the NPC, Ken Randall AM, who also introduced Michael O'Neill.

anyhow..i hope..this relates

[same book]

it relates to improper comprehention...of the death-thing
and how if the spirit...is prepared..for the next level
[or those left behind...knew what they were doing
wasnt helping the departed...adapt..
to their new reality

we just might....be leading all of us to a better future
with knowledge..informing our life/death decisions
instead of theory/need/want

the writer/visited a crossed-over..soul...surrounded by..
oh heck..read it or not

<<the presence..of a number/of bright purple..hair-lines
which, emanating from..the body of the/sleeper,
passed across..and out of the room,..I knew not whither.

My friend informed me/that-these..were love-cords
which existed..by reason of the uncontrollable/grief
of the friends..left behind.

Great difficulty,..he explained,
is frequently experienced..in dealing with these-earth attractions,

and if..friends..could only know
how their unrestrained-grief..finds a response
in those they mourn - disturbing and breaking their rest -
it would do much to/remedy the wrong..they are thus unintentionally the cause of.

Should the sleeper awake/before the force..of these cords can be weakened,..which not unfrequently happens,..the soul-is drawn back again to earth,..and naturally participates..in the agony of its friends,

which is/also..increased by..the discovery
that it is both powerless..to make its presence known,
or in/any way..minister to the relief of the mourner.

In the case before us,..messengers had/been
continually dispatched,..and every available-influence employed to try and stem..the torrent of these sorrowing friends.>>

so impeding..the natural progress/of the departed-spirit

who...in responding..to the earth-pull
are risking..getting/becomming..earth-bound..dis-incarnates

or worse..be tempted..to/take possesion of another
and risk going-to hell...
for violating..the principles of freewill..[gifted]..to all

who could have thunk-it
dying..aint as..simple as it seems

ignorance is no excuse...we claim..to be enlightend..
its time..we became/more informed..about this life...and the next

"Re your response to Merv, we can all play that logic-game: are YOU suggesting that if anyone runs someone else down with their car, that should always be treated as an accident ?"
No Loudmouth, that is not the same logic at all.

Mine is comparing the withholding the right to request to be euthanized on grounds of hypothetical misuse, to withholding other important rights that actually do result in many deaths from misuse.
That is precisely what he seemed to be saying, that despite many people who are suffering, there are stories on the news of children killing their parents (didn't verify why) and although rare, "once is too much", and would be foolish to pursue in parliament.
That would imply prevention of Euthanasia legalization because risk of misuse by a minority trumps the rights of many others not to suffer.
You can re-read it and tell me where my presumption was off if you want.

The other made by you, I simply cannot see the relationship, and can't help but wonder if it is pure nonsense of no relevance at all, attempting to portray the same to mine, unless you can elaborate.

And let me say it again- the two reasons for opposing it (the evil doctor and the evil relatives) are pure garbage- freak situations that ignore the shortcoming of needing a DEMAND from the patient to die compeltely foiling their plans, and the existing ease to murder a frail person and make it look like an accident or a heart attack, regardless of if Euthanasia is legalized or not.

Don't be so defensive, Cornflower.

>>It is disingenuous of you to insist there is no difference between the statement I made and what you claimed I said<<

I'm simply interested in one thing.

Is there, or is there not, a survey whose results show that 75% of the several hundred thousand members of National Seniors are opposed to voluntary euthanasia?

The reason I am interested is that the most publicised statistic is that 80% are in favour.

http://www.euthanasia.cc/97-1dvd.html

So, do you have a source, or not?

It is a very simple question.

David G and others, can we talk about how 'the group' influences the choices of individuals, even those individuals that are opposed to the concept of euthanasia, or other difficult legislative proposals, for that matter?

Can we talk about how concepts slide and drift, as technological changes allows new ideas to be applied to legislation?

That new circumstances challenge older legislation is just part and parcel of lawmakinig, as with the now mainstream screening of mothers for Down Syndrome children, so that affected foetuses can be aborted just before the 20-week mark.

How do these new uses of older legislation affect the community, and the individuals making the 'choices' expected of them?

Okay, can we start at the other end and agree on what is NOT permissible ? This is my preference list, in order of permissibility:

1. Healthy people, full of life, should not be killed.

2. Elderly people, in reasonable health, should not be killed.

3. Elderly people in poor health, who expressly indicate that they do NOT want to be killed, should not be killed.

4. Elderly people who are dying, and who indicate that they do NOT want to be killed, should not be killed.

5. Dying people who are insensate, e.g. with dementia or Alzheimer's, who have left no Will, should not be killed.

6. Dying people, who are paralysed and unable to indicate either way whether they wish to live or die, but are in great pain, should not be killed but should be provided with as much pain relief as is required, even if it may hasten their death.

7. People who have indicated, through a Will, that they wish to die, can be euthanased, i.e. by the supervised actions of a Second Party, a doctor or nurse.

8. People who have indicated that they wish to die and who are capable of carrying out their own euthanasia, should be allowed to do so, i.e. by their own hand, but this should not directly involve any other person.

9. People should, after appropriate counselling, be allowed to commit suicide.

It's probably a lot more complicated than that, but I'm sure that everyone contributing to this thread has his or her own definition of what constitutes euthanasia. I'm comfortable with 7, 8 and 9, but there are inferences and veiled hints from some contributors about other situations - incredibly compassionate and tearful support for option 6, and some support on economic grounds for 5, and even for 3 and 4.

In my view, options 8 and 9 constitute suicide, and only option 7 could be called euthanasia.

Is this getting too specific ? Where is YOUR limit ?

Joe

Actually Loudmouth those guidelines are very good;

Personally, my law;

1- a euthanization can ONLY be called into action by the patient who intends to be euthanized him/herself (be it directly or in will). So any form of unwilling killing will be treated as murder and are thus the obvious basis of the laws (1-5). In lacking of these, the law MUST er on the side of prolonged life and palative care.

2- The euthanizer MUST explicitly instruct the patient in the procedure and must ask for permission again before setting it up, and the third time to clarify that person's wishes to push the button (if that person is physically incapable of doing it themselves).
(this is to prevent somebody from legally summoning a euthanizer when they were merely suffering a brief day-long state of fever or drug side-effects). Also, that patient must not have any trace of drugs that may induce such emotions that are NOT vital to their health with no alternatives.

3- A patient must be suffering a long-term ailment, be terminally-ill or over pension age to qualify.

4- A person's autonomy is to be fully respected, even if mentally disabled. On top of (2), additional impartial witnesses of medical or possibly legal nature must be present to verify will to die if their sense of judgement is questioned.

5- Laws 6-7-8 I agree with completely, (obviously having expressed them previously myself in the past).

Oops - at 3 and 4, I should have specified the other way around - that people who did NOT express a desire to desire, quite explicitly, were not to be killed. People shouldn't have to express a desire NOT to die - that is precisely what should be taken for granted, that life should continue to be recognised as a right.

Clearly, the controversy may rage over whether 6 and/or 7 constitute euthanasia. At a rough guess, I would assume that 1 - 5 would not do so, in most people's minds ? And 8 and 9 would constitute suicide, and therefore not euthanasia, strictly speaking ?

Of course, there may be some very Dark Greens who would support even 1 and 2, humans being worthless excescences despoiling the Earth Mother. I wouldn't mind betting that there is a debate going on behind the scenes within the Greens about where the limits of euthanasia are :)

Joe

Loudmouth, "I wouldn't mind betting that there is a debate going on behind the scenes within the Greens about where the limits of euthanasia are :)"

Heh, heh, that might very well be the case, because I have suggested in previous posts, there certainly doesn't appear to be any debate about fixing the broken aged care system that has been that way for years.

Nor is there any interest in tackling, or even acknowledging, the dismissive attitudes and disgraceful discrimination against seniors that have become features and fixtures of our culture.

Speaking of dyed in the wool dark Green supporters...
Pericles, "So, do you have a source, or not?"

Still pretending you are unaware of the source and the link already given to you? Again, if suits you to pretend ignorance, so be it. Again, the record is here for all to see.

As noted previously, Michael O'Neill's address to the National Press Club was shown on the television and consequently I don't have a personal video copy to hand out, but a transcript or DVD is available to anyone from the NPC for a small fee (link given earlier). That is up to you but again, it is childish of you Pericles, to pretend it isn't there by linking to the promotional material on the NPC site as you have done.

"that people who did NOT express a desire to desire, quite explicitly, were not to be killed. People shouldn't have to express a desire NOT to die - that is precisely what should be taken for granted, that life should continue to be recognised as a right."

I hope that is clear in my policy also.

Euthanasia has to be REQUESTED by the patient for it to even be on the table, or else the practitioner simply does not pay a visit. Simple as that.
It would be illegal to summon a euthanizer or for a doctor with such a license to offer it, and ask the patient if they're up on the offer. The patient has to actually summon them.

King Hazza,

Okay, with the proviso that if the person was not capable of carrying out the actions required, then with witnesses being present and an oral statement clearly expressing the person's wishes, the euthanasia could go ahead - and only if the person was in intense pain, and that all possible pain relief had been made available. After all, we're talking about taking someone's life here, it's not like buying a secondhand car.

If the person WAS capable of carrying out the actions required, and still wanted to proceed after obligatory counselling then no other person should be involved.

i.e. euthanasia ONLY in situations of clear intent, intense unrelievable pain AND inability to carry out the required actions.

For the record, I would still prefer that all possible alternatives to dying prematurely, or being killed, were explored.

Joe

im/pretty-much over the topic/so add my final thoughts

police should be involved/..asp
dna identification of all parties concerned/should be collected

[witness statements/heirs/docters..must all be recorded]
patient must be aware...and reveal who said what

full declaration of all medicines be noted
and certified by collection of hair-sample's/nail clippings..
body fluids/drug samples

full autopsy must be done
[double blind...ie non involved 3 rd party]

it must be treated as a potential crime-scene
at all stages

and a high level of certainty...
must be ascribed to retaining..all the evidence/

and certain id..of all parties-concerned..[verifyable by dna]
signed witness statements/witnessed and certified..[via dna..full id]

patient must have knowledge of after-life

know of lifes continuance
and the need/..there..to balance past actions
by doing acts of repentance/

but also the importance accorded to grace/mercy/fairnes

ALL PARTIES/concerned..must know/disclose....all the facts
[spirituial as well as physical/medical]

[and all-possabilities...
and posable repercussions/legal/moral]

it is not to..become a beurocratic maze
neither to/be taken lightly

there must be no..saving of cost..aspect..in any consideration
[ie...it must-not/be the cheap-option]

docters must definitivly..state/certify..validaTE..the medical facts
then have them certified and confirmed..fully disclosed

and eventually verfied by the dna/evidence-samples/autopcy

nothing can be said to/be failsafe
and human.error..becomes more that casual-error]

[not taken lightly..nor for..oops i was wrong

ie..[have consequences..
morally spiritually/physiclly]

ok thats..the line of my thinking

julia...your paid to represent firstly..the..poor /oppressed/sick/maimed..
to be the care-giver..of the common wealth...on gods behalf

regardless of your beliefs..
your only a young-child...[spiritually...
and it seems..a novice politically..

your not..serving special intrests..but the common/intrests

being by..acting as trustee..over the common trust

[the true wealth...the people...their cultures..entitlements
[as enjoined mortal-heirs,sic,]..of the eternal omnipotesent good..[god]

and their god..given estates...and various occupations/needs/wants/hopes and dreams

god really is watching you..
but/not..to judge you

only that you serve the common-weal
by serving..the common good

serving collectivly..
by protecting the..right's..of..each..individually

It would appear that you don't, Cornflower.

>>So, do you have a source, or not? It is a very simple question.<<

If you had, it would be the easiest thing in the world to point to it. Instead, all we get is obfuscation.

>>Still pretending you are unaware of the source and the link already given to you? Again, if suits you to pretend ignorance, so be it. Again, the record is here for all to see<<

Your first link was to the "transcripts" page of the NPC. Presumably you have already downloaded a transcript, so you are in a perfect position to quote from it. So long as you stick to the "fair use" guidelines, you won't have a problem with copyright.

Your second link was to the 7.30 report. No mention of euthanasia. No mention of a survey. What was the purpose of providing the link, if it contained no useful information?

It surely would be of substantial, and extremely newsworthy, interest to show how there are two conflicting statistics in favour of euthanasia. One that reflects the views of the general public, of all ages, and one that makes clear tha attitude of the elderly, who by definition are most affected.

Sadly, I am beginning to suspect that you were mistaken about the existence of the survey, and simply lack the courage to admit it.

Actually Loudmouth I feel that's for the patient to decide;
In other words, the requirements for euthanasia should be;

1- the patient asks to be euthanized, with witnesses to verify true intent, either direct-verbally- or otherwise in a will if rendered incapable

2- The patient must be suffering a long term illness/disability with no immediate prospects of recovery, is very old, terminally ill, or is in great pain, and free of mind-altering drugs that are NOT necessary for prolonged life or symptom relief.

Otherwise, I'd just respect their wishes. I see no reason why a person in such a state should have to go through an obstacle course, when killing ones self is not a decision one ever takes lightly after all, (unless drugged).

Your Majesty,

Forgive me but I do think that in your option (1), if a person is capable of carrying out the actions themselves, then the involvement of anybody else should not be allowed or sanctioned: the principle of self-determination and autonomy would be breached otherwise. Of course, this is where we can get into very ambiguous territory, once a (capable) person has died and other (capable) people are present - how do you tell, one way or the other, that they have not been killed by someone else, their 'helper' ?

Which is why even suicide would have to have all sorts of conditions around it: no-one else within cooee of the means of death, nobody else holding the pill-bottle or whatever, nobody else being present. Otherwise, how would the legal system distinguish between suicide and the involvement of another person, and between that involvement and murder ? Do we video the moment ? So the best contribution that a suicider can make to their friends' and relations' well-being is to carry out their decision alone.

And the best contribution their friends and relations can make is to provide on-going love and support, enough to get them to change their minds. Every human being is precious, every life is precious, and we get only one of them, and that's it.

Joe

"Thinker", are you STILL assuming that we're talking about drug-consumption, or law/policing policy with another country?

I sincerely hope you have disassociated this debate from "Drugs are bad and must be stopped" and into the second one (the choice of police policy- the one you had not touched in your response), because not only would this be a very bad reflection on you, worse still is I had been wasting my time trying to present in as plain terms as possible the argument most of us are focusing on.

All this nonsense about only getting one life so we have to hang onto it even if it's the pits, even if we're vegetables or in terrible agony! People who think like this need psychological help!

All I can say is thank heavens we only get one life given its ups and downs. And surely, at the very least, we deserve to die peacefully at a time of our choosing.

http://dangerouscreation.com

Straw man, David. While I believe that you (and you alone) should have the right to bring your (one and only) life to an end, I'm sure that you still have plenty to contribute to your fellow-humans, and that your passing will cause sorrow and pain to many people :)

Joe

it/gets..so de-pressing...i hope to shine/a little light

this is but..the first..page-of...life/eternal

we must all begin...life-eternal...
by learning..the lessons..of this life

<<..revelation/that..had more/influence..and consolation than/words.

There is/but..one-way
for all mankind to travel..on their pilgrimage to God;

the earth/stages..tampered with..and rendered difficult-to/trace,
but from-where..my feet are/standing..the way was/clear
and unmistakable.

It was the way/called..Straight,..whose/engineer was God Himself,
and it/bore..His-stamp..and seal,..even as/we find it
{wrote/large}..upon the face/of Nature.

At this/point-Nature..became to/me
the interpreter of grace,..and my soul drifted/with its flow
into the ocean..of another revelation.

What man/can-stand..with watch in hand/and say
‘The day is dead,..and night is born?’
Who can divide...accurately/the seasons as/they come and go?

Who is learned/enough..to fix the boundary/of-sleep?

The early frosts of/winter..are sandwiched
into autumn's golden-days,..and spring dove-tails her/sunshine
into{winters}..icy blasts;

daylight comes/back..with insinuating pulses,
stealing a footing unobserved upon/the cheek-of..night;

the opening/leaves{of..the budding flower}..
put forth..so stealthily/that even though..we stand on/guard
to watch,..we should be/compelled to say..“It is not;..yes,it/is.”

In Nature..there/are..no leaps and bounds,
no cul-de-sacs..or chasms,..or sharp divisions in its/great-law of progress;

the order/is,..unfoldment from/within,
stimulated by/the..appropriation of/congenial nourishment..from/without.

This same/development..is also/observable..in the stages/of life,
so/far-as..they come within/the cognisance..of mortals.

Who/is learned-enough..to discover..the instant/of being,
or tell{infallably}..the time of the soul's departure?

Who can say/when unconsciousness..unfolds into consciousness,
or the/instinct..of the babe/gives place-to intelligence?

Who can/define..when responsibility is/born,
or draw a..line/between infancy..and boyhood?

So{to}..the parallel of/nature..and{creation/of our}soul
might be continued{even as our living/being be continue}d

...But..enough!

If the/same-law..is evident at/the..commencement,
and continues..as far/as man can/trace it,
by what right..do/we assume..
that any change/occurs..beyond our/ken?..{knowing}

Given the/same God..as Creator/and Preserver
Author and Finisher..and He/unchangeable,
why not/the..same law..and that/Immutable?

The thought..consoled me,..gave me strength..and peace.
The distance between/me..and my/ideal..was no doubt great;
but it would/be..reached by a natural-process
of which the/duration..to a great-extent,..lay in my own hands.

‘God is no respecter/of persons’;
there is/no royal-road or cross-country cut..

but One Way/which is..

‘the way,

{of/love..respecting..all life}

the truth,

{the truth..that this/life
is one..life-long journey/
that none...have autherity..to call..ended}

and the life,’

{gifted to-each...by him
who grants...even..the most/vile..

their gift..of life...by/..his love}

that we/do..to the least
we do to him..{the most}

Under one god, Iran, Saudi Arabia? Yes the Islamic fundamentalists and the christian fundamentalist have almost the same bronze age superstitious fears indoctrinated into them from birth.
Tell us under one god and crazy Jim Wallace do you guys go to 21st century medical specialists when you get sick or injured or do you pray "beg favours" with chants and rituals from your religious dark age deities and conjured up imaginary saints like Mary MacKillop?
Your religious cults have obstructed every scientific and medical endeavour known to mankind, they still are, this is just another, you must be horrified hearing an in-vitro fertilisation specialist has just won a noble prize?

You've nailed it, HFR: as Richard Dawkins wrote just after 9/11, one of the most dangerous myths is that there is an afterlife, to which Islamist suicide bombers think they will go to consort with their own 72 perpetually-renewable virgins. As Schopenhauer suggested, if you can convince a Christian that there is no afterlife, he will become an atheist within twenty minutes.

And yes, the worrying thing at the moment is the similarities between Islamist, 'Eretz Israel' Jews, fundamentalist Christians, and even the Hindutva 'Aryans' - that they think

(a) that there is a god [or in the case of Hindutva, 44 million gods] on their side, and

(b) that by being obedient to a book, they can gain eternal life, if not just yet then at the 'End of Days'.

It's ironic that deep-believers, on the one hand, and deep-Greens, on the other, both devalue human life so much: one mob proclaims that a post-earth life will be so much better; the other mob seems to despise humans so much that they would rather they didn't exist at all.

What puzzles me is that god-believers are the ones who oppose euthanasia, while the earth-believers are quite enthusiastic about it, with their endless scenarios of extreme pain and dignity of human life, and therefore......

Please spare us from both.

Joe

A fair point Joe, and that would need to be clarified;

It would be appropriate to require if the patient were capable of flipping a switch, then they should do so, or otherwise demand some witnesses (preferably other doctors, possibly a lawyer though that may be getting too excessive a requirement).

This also raises the question of who is qualified and should be obligated to play a part, and what happens if such people fail to show up?

Go on-

hfa/quote..<<Your religious cults..have obstructed every scientific and medical endeavour..known to mankind,>>.

when/your presuming..please base your presumptions..on facts
your athiestic streak...reveals much/error

had/they decided to/obstruct...'every' scientific/medical endeavour...there wouldnt be any...

but you couldnt grasp how/much they have shapped..
everything from palitive-care..to botanical/astrological-science

but your bias..has blinded you/into making extravigent/egsagurations
...easilly disproved..by any..with even a basic grasp of the facts..[which clearly you..lack]

<<you must/be..horrified..hearing..an in-vitro fertilisation specialist..has just won a noble-prize?>>.

the way your carrying/on..you would think..you had won it
if you recall mr noble...invented explosives...that kill..and main many..even today...

where-as invitro..gives life/joy..of parenthood..to many...
worthy to win a better prize..than from one/that-made..his money
from blowing up kids...

who only concieved the peace/prize..
after reading his own orbituary..[printed in error]...
and he realised his true..'gift'..to humanity/was the..destruction of war...

but you possably cant grasp the irony
so blinded are you by science

yet further/clear error abounds from your every/biased-word

i was raised athiest...a true science believer
lived/breathed science...and decried god..for near 30 years

then realised..much sold as science-fact..is pure deciet
[or at least theory...and unable to/be replicated]
but you in your blind ignorance
enjoy being decieved

and thats fine...its not your call..to euthanise..or not
so you can afford to remain ignorant...

im only intersted..in helping those
who/are facing..the moral challange..of their life-time

death holds..no fear for me...
[i dont use/want/nor need..any docters]

not much time..for lawyer's/politions/
nor ignorant..athiests..such/as you..either

anyhow cheers eh

enjoy your..one short life
may we...never meet again..eh?

king-hazza/admits joe..to have/made a fair...point
so lets..egsamine..his..'point'..point-by-point
as mfa/has-gone..silent

quote/joe..<<You've/nailed-it,..HFR:..as Richard-Dawkins..wrote>>ok he claims..utterance..of..the famed/asstronimer[dick-dorkins]..as infalable/lol..because?

he/uttered..<<just after..9/11,.."one/of..the most dangerous-myths..is that/there-is..an afterlife,>>..SO PLEASE..MR...dorkins/..joe/..mr;sfa....please prove*..your opinion..
WITH/PROOFS...verifyable FACTS

the/only proof/prophered..being<<to which..Islamist/suicide-bombers..think-they/will..go to consort with their/own 72 perpetually-renewable virgins.>>

[you/havnt..seen..the vile-virgin..[love-less...
who roam in hell...so dont be supprised of/karma..
not equalling their hope..

but your proof..is yet another..athiestiic?..god-head

<<As Schopenhauer..?..suggested,<<if you can convince..a/Christian that/there-is..no afterlife,>>thats a big...IF

<<he/will..become an-atheist..within twenty minutes>>
again..please..give..your/..PROOF?.

'he'../implies..its a..male-thing
20 minutes..is very specific..even/scientific

but lets-hear..YA PROOF?



<<And yes,..the worrying-thing..at the moment-is..
the similarities between Islamist,..'Eretz-Israel'Jews,
..fundamentalist/Christians, and..even the..Hindutva..'Aryans'>>

you/claim..only one..brief-life/whats it-matter[to-you]...
when your dead...you believe..there is nouthing
thus life..has no/added meaning..[for you]..
other..than..it being..chance/fluke/accident..ie..[not design]

then/missrepresent<<that/they-think>>as being proved/errant
how..is your..errant/thought..any more valid?

<<..(a)..that/there..is a god>>thats..your/point?...lol

please prove..your opinion
this is meant..to be a debate..
based on fact...[how about..presenting/some?]

YOUR./further..evidence...being<<(b)..that by/being obedient..to a book,..they can gain/eternal life,>>>oh how ignorant..those blinded/by ignorance can be

HAD..you read...THE/books..you would know
we all..are re-born..yes even ye unbelievers

but why comfort..those rejecting/gods grace/mercy/
thus chosing to re-birth..[yes ye must..ALL...be-born..AGAIN]..
even/those destined..to rebirth,..in the darkness of/hell..

simply/via rejecting..god's/love/mercy[the light]...
leaving..for them..alone..the dark/hells..
where the other..godless[rejecting grace/mercy/love...CHOSE..to dwell

<<It's ironic..that deep-believers,>>>[closed-minds]..of all errant/beliefs..get it all wrong/..consistantly..

be it 100/demonic-virgins...that the life-giver/..gifts*
..to those doing murder..of life..only he/can..make live..[science hasnt/even-come..close/to creating/let alone evolving..life..lol

<<and deep-Greens,..that/devalue human life>>>hey mr ignorant
your shooting athiests...with ya friendly fire...lol
typical of the level of debait

<<one mob/proclaims..that a post-earth/life>>to wit believers

<<the other-mob..seems to despise/humans..so-much/that..they would rather..they didn't exist..at all.>>>
flat-earther/..athiestic..one life..thats/it..types?

<<god-believers..are the ones/who oppose euthanasia>>
that ye do/did..to the least..ye did/do to god

<<earth-believers..are quite/enthusiastic..about-it>>
figuring/they..wont be-held..to account

karma...declares...more/of..THE SAME..[you gave]
thall-be/given..in the same/coin[like for like]
love4love/hate4hate/beware for what you wish/for

how/about proof...mate?

i regret/my-words..to-be..so/harsh

but had..my lessons/learnings/facts..been applied...to me..more blunt..
maybe i wouldnt..have been decieved..by faulse-athiestic/deceptions..for so-long

see/athiests...cant prove/their faith
have/no-facts..only opinion..hurt..to give/for..hurt/..born of fear/disappointment

see we..judge/god..by human-measure..eg..[how-can/he..allow/suffering]
but see/we are between..beast/angel

we stradle...seemingly-alone..
between..the material..and the spiritual
we/search..for logic..trying to make sense..of the in/sensable[that unseen...that sustains life...seeking cause..seeking answer

maybe/you can find solace/answer..in this quote
[from..'the gate/of heaven]

<<the altitude/of our-belief
by no/means-affects..the/validity-of..a fact...>>

except/we can..convince/ourselves/others
of the most-seemingly contradictory..fantasies/
blinding us..from/seeing...the true/facts..

ie..life from non-life
something..your..athiestic/godheads-even
have failed/to..achieve/replicate..[despite..their-many..theories]


but/back-to..the quote..<<The/wise-men,..of the ancients..asserted that/the..earth-was..flat,..with four/corners,..but all/the beliefs of philosophers,..scientists,..and churchmen..in that/respect..were wrong.

Beliefs are/always-subject..to revision/on the discovery of-facts,..and we are/now..standing face to face/with..a fact which proves to us,..that modern/ecclesiastics/and-science..are not..more
infallible/than their predecessors>>see/my many debaits..on the topic

evolution/rebutted
http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=2305&page=0
why/we egsist
http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=3124&page=0
xtian/athiesm/refuted
http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=2411&page=0
even my latest
http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=4008&page=0

back/to quote..<<The difficulty..confronting you/us..is not/that the life..upon which/you have now entered..is wrong,..but rather/that
the..conception*..you formed of/it...under the direction of/those who knew/no more-of..its realities..than/yourself..is wrong.

But you/yourself have/lost..nothing in..the discovery.

If you have/not..entered into the immediate/rewards..they foretold and promised..in return for your belief,..neither/have-you..been visited by/the punishments..with which..they/threatened-unbelief...>>

revealing..that which/your rejecting..isnt so much..god..as much as the fruits of woing-belief/..miss-directed faith..in those..who also have no clue..no idea/about-that..which they dare opinionate

much..we have/been..taught..is wrong

<<new conditions/of being...from child/like-faith..to teen curiosity..to adult.surity..so much/so..that I am already scarcely
able to..recognize my/old self.

Don’t misunderstand/me...

I WE/are..in..the/presence of a..problem..that has..never yet..
been solved,..and I wish/to deal..with-it reverently.

The most/unique..production/the-earth..contains is/Man
a congeries/of..apparently-insoluble/mysteries.

A creature..formed of clay,[or from primevil-soup]..but reportedly..bearing the image of/the invisible God.>>
the unsen cause/of causes..sustaining even the most-vile..thier living

<<A curious/compound..of animal/and..angel,
with one/foot..on either side{of}..the line

dividing the two..dimensions of space-time/matter,..
the/physical part..operating in the third,..and the spiritual/working in the fourth.

In the daytime..he is employed/in..subduing and replenishing..the
earth,..and in the/sleep..of his nights..he is called to study/and graduate in/the university..of heaven.

In this qualification/and adaptation..to occupy/a position-of citizenship/in two worlds,..we can see at/once..the sublimity and dignity of manhood,as designed..and provided/for-by..the matchless wisdom of the Creator.

In/this great-achievement,..consciousness,
through-the/agency..of..the sleep-life>>

or dream-time..as the/first-people..call-it

OUG>

"And the deep greens devalue human life". what! UOG, please stay off the what ever it is your on. I'll have you know, I have saved 78 peoples lives in the day of the surfing scene, and you want to talk about carma! lol,

Why is this still such a hard thing for you all to get your heads around?
The next thing you will be calling me is Dr death. I don't know what you have wedged in your rectum, but for god sakes, go and see a doctor, quick.

Pizza Hazza

"This also raises the question of who is qualified and should be obligated to play a part, and what happens if such people fail to show up"?

Well, you may as well give the job to me since by OUG,s definition ( and as it would be,green supports devalue human life so much and I guess you could say the greens are having a clearance sell this week....Two for the price of one.

Hurry In! Sale starts tomorrow.!

OUG.

You have to be kidding, right.

This subject as been ran over so many times now, its sounding like a broken record.

Get the legal papers in order, and get on with it.

Iam not getting any younger.

TTM>

Loudmouth, these religious nutters don't even realise their mythical cults are simply left overs from astrotheologic sun worship, their whole religion is based on the zodiac the "god son je-SUS and the twelve disciples", are simply the god SUN and 12 zodiac houses, multiply the imaginary Islamic 72 virgins by 5, equals the 360 degrees of the zodiac, multiply the 360 degrees of the zodiac by the 4 seasons, equals 1440 times one hundred, the mythical number 144,000 that will be taken up in the mythical imaginary biblical rapture the cult nutters are indoctrinated into believing and all waiting for. What a pack of gullible fools these religious cults manipulate with their charlatanisms?

OUG. I thought you would find that a good laugh and well it was.smile.

One more thing before I go, How come the religious factions always runs for cover when god cant answer whats involved every-time when science questions becomes too hard for them to think?

I guess Its just easier that way.



Euthanasia will always be a hard emotion journey no matter what or who is involved. Because of what human is, the mission to end someone's life as I see it, almost impossible to even think it.

But when the shoe is on the other foot, the cries from the dieing will scream louder than our so-called humanity will let us.

A Rock and a very hard place it will always be.

All the best.

TTM

one under god, I have no intention of debating a religious cult devotee, your mind is lost in a superstitious, supernatural neurotic fantasy. You should have yourself checked, many religious fundamentalist have frontal lobe epilepsy, that's what causes those imaginary voices in your heads, its definatly not the excommunicated catholic priest paedophile exposer Mary MacKillop!
Read some history, if your cult allows you to read books, you know those things the Catholic cult banned and burned for a millennia, we are allowed to read and write now, make the most of it, while we still can? Lucky the surgeons don't have to dig up dead bodies from the cemetery for anatomy classes any more, isn't religion just revolting?
It must be terrible for you having a woman Prime Minister, less than a hundred years ago your cult would not have even allowed her a vote!

think/THEN-move..!

try reading
Posted by Loudmouth,..Tuesday,..5-October/2010..5:02:33..PM

THIS PERSON WROTE/..that i quoted

>>>>>>>>>....GET-IT?

so loud-mouth..>>>..consider..yourself rebutted..!

[by...thinking about moving/..then moving aberantly]

i see/sfa..has put his short-oar/
back..into..the deep-waters

QUOTE..<<..I have no/intention..of debating..a/religious-cult..devotee>>>i know..proof..is your weak-point

BUT PLEASE SUPPLY/..some proof...that/im..a cult/member

your in la/la-land..sunshine...
i dont belong-to..any organisation/group/nor society..FULL_STOP

i shall/use..your own-words..
right-back/at ya..[lol]

your mind is lost in a athiestic/delusion

your clearly/a...supernatural/neurotic..
living in a delusional..vacume/...errant/athiestic-fantasy.

You should/have yourself checked/and seriously/sit-and think
about why my faith//bothers---you/so

>>many ANTI-religious/fundamentalist's/have..NEO-cortex/disconnect
as well as delusions..of persicution-complex...that cause those imaginary voices..of..the athiestic-occult/percicution-complex..in your/head,

as/im NOT_IN ANY CULT..etc..your spurilous-errant/presumtion<<if your cult allows you to read books,>>..is yet again symptomatic..in sustaining your..athiestic/delusional/complex

your high/claim..<<we/are..allowed to read..and write now>>>dosnt alter/the fact..you self-censor..and only read..to cast stones/errant-slur..[as is clearly/reflected..in the limitations of/that you chose-write/about

the next/quote..reveales a further symptomology..of your athiestic/delusions..and some danger-signs..<<the surgeons don't have to dig up dead/bodies..from the cemetery..for anatomy classes/any more>>>

so/that..relates to euthinasia/topic..how....egsactly?

lets/furher/hit-you..with/your-own stick..

<<isn't>>..the athiestic-concept..
that approaches..being athiestic-religion..
just revolting..against the bleeding/obvious...
whats it to do with-you...?

WHAT..you afraid/of..?

god/is love..he forgives/you
i on the other hand...

dont care/much for..forgiving/igno-rants...
who should know better..than to comment..on that they deliberatly..refused to study..about..refuse/to even sek knowledge about

but yet again...your delusions..and casting of slur
yhat seemingly knows no bounds

quote<<It must/be..terrible for/you
having a woman Prime Minister,>>

mate..having met/her...
and corrosponding with..her-office regularilly...

mate..your just/in delusion/ville...{yet again]...lol
get/help-mate...

ps..watch/them..grave-robbing docters...lol..dont get-ya

please/note..
further..distorted/delusions...from sfa..deleted

please..can/we now

return...to topic..!

back2topic...quote/from...the/gate-of heaven

<<in/the-treatment..of an/individual-soul..there is/no technical..
hard and fast-curriculum,..or..mechanical-procedure,..in God’s/great-university.

Each soul enters/having its-own..special-features/needs,environment,and requirements.

Every contributory-cause*..to its present/condition..is taken-into/analytical-account.

Sins/which are due-to...the father..are carried/over-to..the father’s account,>>
and/those decieved/away..from god..by athiestic decievers/shall be content-to/know
their decievers..get/the credit-too

<<and/receive..a corresponding-consideration..Not..a/stain..or taint is found
upon the soul..but{that/which}..is scrupulously..traced-back..to/its source,
in fulfilment..of the law..that..“Whatsoever a/man..soweth..that shall-he/also..reap,”


and..when the/righteous,..{correct}..result/is ascertained,..
then/the soul is dealt with.. with a view/to..securing..
its ultimate/atonement{at-one-meant}..with God.

It is/in such-an..adaptive/arrangement..as this
that the..Psalmist discovers/that..“The law of the Lord..
is perfect,..converting the soul”..(Ps. xix, 7).

We..who are/not-yet..perfected,
are/not..in a position to..know all/that this..implies;
but this..I do know

this one thing..I have seen..and spoken of/more than once already,
and I earnestly..commend it..to the notice of..every soul..who reads..these records:

In the judgment/passed..on the soul..as it steps..into the immortal
{as-it/steps back-into]..the righteousness..of God
stands prominent..as a surprising leniency,..

*we discover Justice to/be a compassionate-divinity,..and not/an..avenging fury.

If there-is..one fact/more deeply engraved..on my consciousness
than/another..by the revelations-of..this higher life,..it is this:

that God..has in/His mind..but one purpose/concerning..the whole family of man
..to love/him..with an everlasting love,..and with-loving-kindness
to draw him/back again..to the inheritance..he has forsaken..
through the machinations...{and/their errant-love}..of sin.

Can/there-be..a more pathetic..and yearning/declaration of this,
than is heard..in the invitation of/the Christ,
who speaks..as../the voice of..the Father:

“Come unto me,..all ye that labour..and are heavy-laden,
and I*will..give you rest!”..(Matt. xi, 28).

From/what a..babbel of confusion/the-world..would escape,
what a clearer..conception of God would dawn,
if,{by]..setting aside..the theological
..{thiestic/At-thiestic..}..dogmas..
and
unauthorized/interpretations,>>

cast so..ignorantly/..upon the masses
by both..opposing/doogmatic-creeds..decieved away from love
for no other reasoning..than idolitry..and selling of their errant selfishness

may god bless/those..serving the goods..of life..and living
upon..those only god sustains to living
that life/may find love

in/grace-mercy..

[the good/fruit's..of god..and love..of other
as much..as/we..can love..our-self and our/own]

let/your-works..be good-unto others
that ye do..to/for..the least..ye do-to..god

think/THEN-move..!

try reading
Posted by Loudmouth,..Tuesday,..5-October/2010..5:02:33..PM

THIS PERSON WROTE/..that i quoted

>>>>>>>>>....GET-IT?

Sorry, your quite right and I enjoyed the read.

If the people of this world had read "all" that Ive said, it equals your words to a tee.
All that we see, is the human condition. No-one can take the religious out of the human, no-matter how hard they try. Can I give you some examples of what I mean.

When a person sees something horrid, You know the first thing that comes out of the mouth.........OH MY GOD. See! its all in us, the word.

When a person hits their finger with a hammer its, Jesus Christ that hurts.

When a person feels frighten and are in fear of death, "Oh please god NO, help me please. etc.

See its in us all and it cant be taken out just coz some-one says its not true, they all do say it every day.

Without the gods, the human race would not have made it this far.

OUG. When I first came to this site, there was fighting all over the place, and I took it upon myself to show the human condition and its complex systems.

Is there a god?

I don't know, and I always keep an open mind.

You maybe right, I don't know.

But what does mankind realty know? its nothing.

I have always been looking for the meaning of life, and my friend, I have not found it, yet!

So, I will keep on looking for it and some day, after death perhaps, I too will have to stand before god and tell him why I did not see.

I don't think god will hold me or scorn me too hard, I hope.

I have to face my own mortality one day as all will, Iam sure of that.



I think mankind should not question these things, but if one does not ask, one shall not find.


This is how it all started.

TTM

The scariest and most important thing about these frenzied up christian fundamentalists is that if they had been born in Iran or another islamic theocratic country they would be islamic fundamentalist demanding we have sharia law, totally opposed to the other religious cult. And we are expected to have to listen to and have respect their fantasies and superstitions, why?

so/lets..get-back/to basics

basiclly..athiest/believe..only..one-life
thus..their/lives..MUST-not..be cut-short..
till..they/have learned..this lifes-teachings

[clearly...let/the-dead..tend..the dead
cannot/apply...to-the_living]

those...KNOWING..
they..will-be..reborn..immediatly/following-transition

give/them..coma

[ie/those..not-decieved..
into..the lie/of..reserection/judgment-day]

quote/from
http://www.jhardaker.plus.com/pdf/The%20Life%20Elysian.pdf

<<All..the loved/ones..you..have lost..{for/the-time}
are present/with..the Master.

They follow/Him..wheresoever..He goeth.

If...!..He/come again..to redeem the/promise,..
‘Lo! I am with thee,’..shall/not..they/too..come..with Him?

Would/they..not gladly come?
if/the plan/were..to return

Do you think..their love,..their interest
and/concern..for your welfare..has perished?

Strong..as/you have believed..death to be,
do you think..it is strong/enough..to crush..their old/affection?

I speak to you..as men and women.

Is the/hope..
I would inspire..too-large/..too/good..to/be true?

Thomas once/thought so..
till the risen/living-Jesus..stood/before..him.

Are you/not..as-precious..in the eyes/of..the Father
who is..no respecter/of persons..as/Thomas was?

Is He not..still-able to..answer the/same..incredulous hope,
the staggering/commonsense..love/grace/mercy,..as{much}as-ever?

If death has/once..for all..been/swallowed-up..in life,
is it/not..time the truth..was known,..and the balm of/its divine gospel..freely poured-out..for the healing/of..the brokenhearted?

Mighty minds..wield mighty/forces:

is not..our Christ..travelling/in-the greatness-of His strength>>

ok/there..was more-to/that
but...see he..all-ready come-back...[after 3 days]..

PROVING..the lie/of..judgment-day!
proving..there is no/waiting..in ya grave..till reserection-day!

res-erection..is near immediate..[for most]..ie..those dead of natural causes..[having served their/life-term..many waking-up in the light/love..underr-grace/by gods-mercy

and a few..predicably..awaking in/the dark
[many because..their spiritual-sight..
hasnt adapted..to the new conditions...

but others..because-of..other attatchments..
eg[to the flesh/ego/or love of vile]..

but..in the main..we each/wake-up..in the light..having passed through..the mist/veil

but importantly..we/all..get born-again

and get reborn/again..each time/we progress/spititually..
[up to 3 rebirths..isnt un-usual]

we/often awake..in..the astral-realm..where/we-go..when-dreaming..the..dream-zone]

[this type of rebirth..often notices..the silver-cord...
[in the mist..and blue island..specificlly/fall into/that..realm]

gone-west...reveals..the lower/level..of..that we clasiclly call heaven[light]...

as well as that..we call clasicly/..hell
[rejection/of-the light/..thus dark..twi-light/etc]

of course..to their/inhabitants..both are..as-like..heaven

both meet the needs..[loves/passion/hate/vile/good]...of their many inhabitants..thus its best..to-be carefull...of that/..you chose to love[here]..as/more-shall..be/given

and if..you love..thieving..you dwell/..with-the thieves

or if you love murder..you reside/..with those loving/to murder

[trouble/being..there are those
who love murder/thieving/deciet...etc
..better/than theee..[so guess/who..they pick-on]

anyhow..needless to saty..you soon/get-to realise..
what it feels-like[how you made others feel..[regardless of wether..you made/them feel-good..[or ill]..loved/hated...

KNOW..the certainty..
MORE..SHALL-be GIVEN

that/alone..could change/this..world

thinkthanmove...its..ok...if you had/not posted

i would/not-have..reacted...

every-thing..is..for/a higher-reason

gods/reason..not ours..
[there are/no accidents..only learnings]

sfa....as you/should..realise...
i hold...BOTH..religeon...AND...science/politicks..law
equally to account...responsable..for-much/error

but.by the same/token..i see they served...
[ok serve]..their purpose

had/i not been punitivly/jailed..for letting a plant-grow...
i should-have..remained..ignorant...of/all..these matters

eg...i had/time..in jail...to research..the law/read the bible/torah/koran...even learn..about buddism..ichin...who have become..foundations..that validate...god/GOOD

not that..their words are/holy..[wholy-true]
god..gives/..ongoing..live-time..revelation

but that/they{holy-texts}..introduce/us
to the concept-of...the higher cause/reasons...

[and yes many/use
their errant-judgments..to do/justify vile/evil}.

but by far..the fruit..of the/teachings
of those truelly..our bettors
has shapped much/that is good..in this material-realm

evil..likes to blame..others
go figure they blame..their miss-comprehentions...on the/most holy

see/that god...lives in real-time
is/that good/loving..[living]..inner
{conscience}..voice of reason

god..is truelly..inside/you
equally.as she-is..in..all_living

of course..basser...lives,...
cant comprehend...the good...she/wispers
but never/the less..

on the rare/occasion..we see/the beast..
acting of love..we know..
even the beast..in the field...hears..his creators..living/
loving..still-quiet..inner-conscience

jesus/said..it better

even a beast..in the stable...knows his masters-voice
[to/wit..god is good...if-its not/good..
its not..of god]

see..it dosnt matter..[to god]..what we do
[our/life-gift..is eternal]

we each/have our loves..
and loves..passions/verge..on insanity

but we/do control..the impulses..we chose to act/upon
thus by our works/deeds..
shall we be accorded/more..[of the same]..as/we-chose..to love/here

importantly...spiritual/books..
must be read..with firmly-in/mind
that these reveal...that of spirit...not the flesh

here..we are/but asked..to try to find..love
sadley/evil..takes that as licence..to love...the vile
that returns...to/them..seven-fold

[and thus..THEY..condem/them selves..
to the realm.../where vile is rewarded..
with worser/vile}

much/more..is truelly...given
{be/carefull..of/that-you..CHOSE-to/love]

realise..energy..cannot/be created..
nor destroyed..a living-sperm...
god/breathed..into adam

ensures...that but..one living..{good}..
gave us/ALL..our life{life/from_life]

we have/..but-one..father...[god]

however/much..others..might say..god is/a judge
he..is a living/loving good...{all/grace-full...ALLmercy-full]

and does/..not judge..
any..of/his many-fold...harvest..{children..you/me/us/them}

*that dosnt/mean..his other..children..
are not able/willing..to give..equal-coin..

equal dis-service..for dis-service...
or love..for love

and/we chose..the coin..
by the coin..we used..[chose]..in this realm

HFR, nothing to add to your post, I simply agree so much I felt the need to repeat it.

"The scariest and most important thing about these frenzied up christian fundamentalists is that if they had been born in Iran or another islamic theocratic country they would be islamic fundamentalist demanding we have sharia law, totally opposed to the other religious cult. And we are expected to have to listen to and have respect their fantasies and superstitions, why?"

To be honest this wouldn't be too far from the truth- as they are forcing people to behave, at a personal level and at nobody else's problem, to adhere to somebody else's dogma, to an alarming degree of petiness.

Sorry, Oug, I haven't been reading your posts - in that blank-verse style, like with a lot of people, my mind just stops working. I guess I'm old-fashioned enough to keep looking for subject & predicate, and something grammatical. Is there any chance that you might write something in standard English ?

Thanks :)

Joe

OUG, Give it a rest from your mythical gibberish, as for your hatred of atheist, just remember the irrefutable fact that there are over 2500 religious cults and gods invented conjured up or imagined by mankind! Your superstitions allow you to believe in just one of these supernatural imaginary gods, making you an atheist to all the other 2499 gods and cults, YOU ARE AN ATHEIST to 2499 gods you heretic, the rest of us are simply atheist to all 2500 of these, all once irrefutable gods and cults. All once, just as irrefutable as your totalitarian megalomaniac and genocidal former flat Earth christian cult, a planet and universe created by an invenred mythical supernatural deity 6000 years ago at 4.00 on the afternoon of October 24th, I remember reading, like everything in religion, it was made up by a charlatan.
As for euthanasia, its being used in several countries and some states in the USA for years, there is no problem, the only problem are religious cult devotees who are told to oppose it, they have no choice, they have no say, theirs is just to do what their told and die! Then everything will be just great, while the maggot's and worms devour your rotting corpses, you wont even realise how you were conned your entire lives by charlatanism?
The high court of Australia ruled that charlatanism is the price we pay for religious belief and if ANY religion was asked to prove their supernatural beliefs, ALL WOULD FAIL!

HFR,

As a foundation member of Atheists Against Euthanasia, I have to point out that it is possible to be both atheist and anti-euthanasia.

At our inaugural meeting recently at the Adelaide Cricket Ground (next year, AAMI Stadium), it was suggested that Christians and other primitive-believers may actually be behind the entire pro-euthanasia movement, given that it's all the same to them, life here or life 'there'.

It was further debated that the only Christians (and other believers) who genuinely opposed euthanasia were either those with some perverted idea that their god sanctioned pain and suffering as some sort of warranty of faith in her/him/them, or conversely, those of TOO LITTLE faith who wanted a bet each way (and thereby were already on the road to atheism: a couple of such observer-organisations at the AAE inaugural meeting were offered honorary atheist status, but declined).

Yes, it's great to be able to go at the time of one's choosing. But I would be happier with legislation which did not allow for some 'miscalculation', which sanctioned the involvement of another person who 'inadvertently' hastened my end. And most certainly, I would oppose any pressure being put on older people (i.e. a year or so older than you, dear reader) to go early rather than later, to 'take pressure off the world's resources', or 'give other people a go', or other excuses that might be concocted to persuade people to top themselves.

In fact, hand-in-hand with any euthanasia legislation, I believe it should be made an offence, similar to incitement to violence, for any person to encourage any other person to kill themselves: after all, it would constitute incitement to death, not just violence, even if that death is peaceful, 'dignified', 'timely', 'one's fair share', 'responsible', etc.

Part of any such legislation (to, say, legalise suicide) should also allow the funding of far more effective anti-suicide counselling services.

We only 'get' one life, HFR, it's up to us what we do with it, how we create meaning in our own lives. We shouldn't give it away lightly. There are no second chances.

Jo

I think that's enough for me;

The whole bottom line of the issue of personal decision is being missed (or dodged) into some kind of institutional decision, when it is easy (not to mention the entire structure of the pro movement) to base the laws around the DEMAND of the patient, not anyone else (and thus would NOT be covered under Euthanasia law and would have roughly the same freedom to act out their will as they do now.

I'm actually convinced that the communication failure is because many people sincerely don't HAVE personal will and cannot seriously believe such a thing exists in others; but themselves live more to somebody else's instructions, and assume everyone else must be too. As such, they are frightened that this will set a precedent for 'bad people' to start appearing and convincing people to kill themselves.

Beyond that, a personal moral inflicted on others that "death" is the worst option and people who feel that being stuck on a life-support is worse are simply wrong and must be prevented from acting on their own beliefs.

There is no way after so much (and unfortunately, repeated) analysis to ensure personal will is the sole instigator is the patient's un-coerced demand to be euthanized as the only legal basis to do it could fail to get through unless for the above explanations;

I always wonder why Australia is so unlucky to have such paternalistic people attracted to politics- now I think it's quite a standard attitude we have here.

Your majesty,

So we will never see the words 'dementia' and 'euthanasia' in the same sentence ?

And has being concerned about the rights of others to 'habeas corpus' become paternalist ?

Oh, brave new world !

Joe

One under god,
Brrrr… your comments give me the shivers! But I accept your right to your views.
You may have been an atheist (really?) but a “true science believer” you certainly were not and never will be. To be a scientist (science believer) you need to be ‘born again’. In your current state of mind; impossible. Science is the art of explaining the natural phenomena via investigation. Science is not a doctrine or a faith document to believe in. Your sentiments about science don’t gel right. So mate, your claim to be once a science person is tantamount to ‘blasphemy’ and thus, dare I say, you have become a ‘heretic’.

I strongly recommend that you read some of Raimon Panikkar & Tony de Mello’s books. Raimon (died at the age 93) said after his long trip to Asia, “I left [Europe] as a Christian; found myself a Hindu; and I return as a Buddhist, without having ceased to be a Christian.” ‘The Cosmotheandric Experience’ by R Panikkar is a must for all sane and muddled people. Please, also read (science, but easy reading for all) ‘The Private Life Of The Brain’ by Susan A Greenfield. You will understand yourself better and have an appreciation for all others as well, including the workings of the brain/mind (and perhaps God). Our narrow and shallow definition of God has caused much misery in this world. God is now being used to silence euthanasia supporters. Good heavens.

Life is certainly a gift and our DNA is designed to self-preserve and propagate. So fear not the free infliction of euthanasia on all. To continue to debate about the ‘right’ and ‘wrong’ of euthanasia appears to be a waste of time. I certainly will not await government approval for what is my personal matter. Imagine Gillard and her masters, Kim Yong Arbib, Kin Yong Shorten, et al, approving or disapproving if I should live or die, if that moment arrives. I shudder